Video Library Of What The 238 Mile Chevrolet Bolt EV Can Do


Chevrolet Bolt EV Offers 238 Real World/EPA Rated Miles Of Range

Chevrolet Bolt EV Offers 238 Real World/EPA Rated Miles (383 km) Of Range

General Motors has far surpassed range expectations for its upcoming, all-electric Bolt EV.

What once was the Chevy that could do about ~200 miles of range, is now the affordable EV with 238 miles (383 km) of real world/EPA range (announcement/details here).

And GM didn’t stop there.

Besides re-confirming that the car would arrive at select dealers by year’s end, AND have a starting MSRP under $37,500, GM put out a library of short films covering the basics on a vast array of topics – all of which you can watch below:

*-Charging times
*-How long does the battery last?
*-Maximizing your range
*-How long does the battery last?
*-How far on a single charge?
*-Can you top off your charge at any time?
*-The different charging options
*-The difference in driving all-electric
*-Do you need gas?
*-Where Can I Charge the Bolt EV When I’m Not at Home?

Bolt EV: Charging Time

Bolt EV: Maximizing Your Range

Bolt EV: The Different Charging Options

Bolt EV: The Difference In Driving All Electric

Bolt EV: Is the Bolt EV for Me?

Bolt EV: Can You Top Off Your Charge At Any Time?

Bolt EV: Do You Need Gas?

Bolt EV: Where Can I Charge the Bolt EV When I’m Not at Home?

Bolt EV: How Long Does The Battery Last?

Category: Chevrolet

Tags: , , , ,

97 responses to "Video Library Of What The 238 Mile Chevrolet Bolt EV Can Do"
  1. Taser54 says:

    Jay’s burning the midnight oil

    1. Jay Cole says:

      Indeed, might just pass on the whole “sleep” thing for tonight…its over-rated anyway, (=

      1. bro1999 says:

        Plenty of time to sleep when you’re dead. ?

        1. Jay Cole says:

          True enough, (=

    2. GIMIJON says:

      BTW…IT’S “NOT” A GAS PEDAL …IT’S CALLED “ACCELERATER PEDAL” .EV’s Don’t Have “GAS PEDALS”…THIS IS An electric car , Right? Or Am I being Foolish??

      1. Nix says:

        You are correct, and not foolish. But maybe a bit pedantic.

        ICE drivers still call it the “gas” pedal, even in diesel cars, where it is technically the “diesel” pedal.

        If ICE car owners we want to convert to EV drivers feel more comfortable with “gas” pedal, I’m perfectly happy to use terms they are comfortable with. There is no real compelling reason to be pedantic with stuff like that, when people know what you are talking about even if the word “gas” isn’t 100% accurate.

      2. Nix says:

        PS — If you really want to get technical, it would probably be better described as something like a “regulator pedal” (or maybe a “governor pedal”?) since technically the pedal can be used for more than just acceleration.

        It can also be used to trigger regenerative braking on an EV, so “acceleration pedal” also wouldn’t be 100% correct.

        If we’re going to go there….

        1. Timmy says:

          Regenerative braking happens when acceleration is negative, so “accelerator” pedal still works. 😉

          This *is* all getting a bit too academic!

      3. MTN Ranger says:

        Technically, gas pedal for ICE is inaccurate since the pedal modulates air not gas flow to the engine.

        1. Raymond J Ramirez says:

          That is very true, either for carburated engines or fuel-injected engines. The correct term, as done for jet engines, is “throttle”.

  2. Is 238 miles range based on the EPA combined city and highway test?

    I guess we still have to wait for the 2xx city and 2xx high range values; as well as usable battery capacity (kWh).

    The EPA’s W/mile or MPGe values could provide the required info to back calculate other values.

    1. Jay Cole says:

      119 MPGe combined – 128 MPGe city, 110 MPGe highway.

      1. SparkEV says:

        Same as SparkEV (128 city, 119 combined, 109 city), except Bolt is better by 1 MPGe in city. Isn’t that odd? Car that’s heavier by ~700 lb has better city efficiency. Maybe they improved the motor and electronics for city driving.

        Bolt motor turns far faster (about 2X) than SparkEV. Curious how they squeezed more from faster turning motor that has higher fluid losses.

        Or maybe all these EPA MPGe rating is BS.

        1. SparkEV says:

          Lack of sleep is detrimental to one’s mental faculties; 109 MPGe is Hwy!

          Then the question is how Bolt has 1 MPGe better when it has same Cd and larger frontal area. Motor/electronics improvement or EPA MPGe rating is BS?

          1. Nix says:

            SparkEV — MPGe in a pure electric car is simply the measure of how many miles you can go on 33.7 kilowatt-hours of electricity on the EPA test cycle. So it is very straight forward, no funny stuff.

            Short of changes in the actual test cycle between when the two cars are rated, they really were tested to travel nearly the exact same distance using nearly the exact same amount of electricity.

            1. SparkEV says:

              I’m just pointing out that SparkEV that’s lighter by about 20% and has smaller frontal area with similar Cd has same rating as Bolt.

              1. mx9000 says:

                The Bolt has a new electric motor?

                1. SparkEV says:

                  New motor that spins faster, too. That would result in more fluid coupling loss (what bogodan calls windage loss below). It could be motor + other efficiency gains. Seeing how SparkEV just kicked butt in terms of efficiency, Bolt’s efficiency is hard to believe, too good to be true. Hopefully, someone will do side by side comparison one of these days to validate.

        2. bogdan says:

          Higher fluid losses?
          Electric motor has copper loss, iron loss and magnetic eddy current loss if it has any magnets.
          And some friction loss from the ball bearing.
          The windige loss from the high speed rotor (surrounded by air) is about zero.
          That’s the case for a traction motor. For small high speed motors u can get a high windage loss, but not for strong traction motors.

      2. Nice … 238 miles / 119 MPGe combined, implies 2.0 Ge usable energy; ie: 67.4 kWh (33.7 kWh/Ge * 2.0 Ge).

        239 mi / 119 MPGe = 3.53 mi/kWh combined
        (3.53 mi/kWh * 119!MPGe = 238)

        128 MPGe city equates to 3.89 mi/kWh or city range of 256 miles

        110 MPGe highway.equates to 3.26 mi/kWh or city range of 220 miles

  3. Jan says:

    Range is really impressive, cant belive it. Hoe could Tesla release 215 miles ? Thats sad, with this good drag it will only have 50-55 kWh battery in there. I mean Tesla should have been able to do some range callculation based on the IDS concepts 60 kwh battery they already relesed 2015. And yes, not everybody lives in Supercharger area, Japan 70000 Leaf drivers don’t need and also Norway, Uk, French or Netherlands have a good infrastructure.
    My M3 cancellation is out, I think many will follow especially if Nissan raise this number with Leaf2 to 260 miles.

    1. floydboy says:

      Tesla hasn’t released anything yet!?

    2. Steven says:

      Tesla said at least 215 miles, like how Chevy said at least 200 initially. I imagine Tesla will do their second unveil in a few months and blow everyone’s minds. Sorry to hear about your cancellation.

    3. Scott Franco says:

      Don’t let the door hit you in the rear on the way out.

    4. Forever Green says:

      Jan, don’t be so quick to cancel your Tesla Model 3 reservations. Tesla may surprise you too. Remember Tesla has the best charging infrastructure out there. I am very impressed with the electric range of the Chevy Bolt. It’s a very interesting time to be an EV enthusiast.

  4. Bul_gar says:

    Looks like the Bolt can take only 50-60kW charging

  5. Michael says:

    Finally, GM pointing out that you only charge what you drive. I’ve always hated the oft quoted charging times for an empty battery. Yes, technically true but unrealistic. Do people often arrive home in turtle mode then trickle charge for 20 hrs?

    Level 1 is slow but adequate for people like myself who drive ~80 km/day

    Level 2 is more than enough for anyone. ~25 mi/hour is the perfect way to let customers estimate their charging times based on the miles they typically drive. Far more useful than saying it will take 10 hours to fully charge a Bolt.

    But that’s what the trolls will focus on.

    1. Ian says:

      Yes. This.

      Whenever I’m publicly charging my car and curious people approach with questions, they’re invariably the same three questions, to which there are no easy answers except to over simplify and state either the best/worst case scenarios, which are unlikely to be indicative of real world experience.
      1. How far will it go?
      Well, that depends. What kind of roads? What kind of average speed? What temperature? Just the driver or will there be passengers? Will you be using heater/AC?
      2. How long does it take to charge?
      Well, that depends. What percentage are you starting from? What percentage are you charging up to? You know you don’t need to go to 100% every time unless absolutely necessary, right? What type of charging point are you using – slow, medium, fast, or rapid?
      3. How much does it cost to charge?
      Well, that depends. How many kWhs will you be putting in? At home or public? If at home, how much does your supplier charge per kWh? If public, who operates the charging point? What’s their pricing structure?

      Good to see a manufacturer take this approach.

  6. Dave R says:

    You know what really impresses me with the videos? They actually use the correct terminology and units where it’s important!

    Example: 240V / 120V charging (instead of 220/110V which doesn’t actually exist) or “charging station” instead of “charger” (the latter is actually in the car for L2 charging).

  7. Joe says:

    Still no detail on DCFC charging capacities? 50kW sounds likely. But that would make this car not suitable for longer range driving. But then, why 238mi range? Is the Bolt really only a city car with more range to fight range anxiety?

    Am I the only one finding this rather lame of GM?

    1. Sch says:

      Where there a real market for EVs, the Bolt would be no competitor for Model 3. They are different class of car.
      If the EPA estimates are correct, it is impresive, how GM got numbers close to BMW i3 without the fancy expensive materials and tech.

    2. Kdawg says:

      I need a “regional” car. Meaning, I need to be able to go on ~200 mile round trips every so often. This is usually to a town that is about an hour away, then back home. With 238 miles, this is possible without having to concern myself with destination charging.

    3. Scott Franco says:

      This is exactly the case. It is an extended range city car.

  8. Bill Howland says:

    Some might find it lame, but name me another vehicle, available very soon, that has this combo of features for this price.

    Some people may be happy with just the 120 volt outlet in their garage or car-port, but I suspect the majority will go for a Level 2 style charger, so this will mean plenty of work for electricians for those who don’t feel comfortable installing a wallbox themselves.

    As far as the 110-120, 220-240 volt issue – all the ‘experts’ here say it doesn’t exists.

    They should come to my neighborhood – our homes have the worst juice I’ve ever seen.

    The saturday before last, with nothing on in the house, my voltage was 102, and 103, with the voltage at the car charger of 205.

    Since nothing was on in the house causing pressure drops, it also meant the juice was 102 at the pole in the backyard.

    110 volts in my case would be a LOT.

    Legally, my utility (National Grid) is required to maintain a window of 114-122 steady state. But good luck trying to get them to change it, since I’m convinced they don’t know what the problem is, and If I told them what the problem was, they wouldn’t understand it, or just say, ‘you’re just the customer’.

    1. Djoni says:

      Fact are always the true measure and can vary a lot depending on the utility.
      The spectrum of acceptable value is quite large.
      Here in Quebec, they have normal condition that don’t need any attention and marginal condition that would be address with an update schedule without emergency.
      Normal would be 110/220 volts and 125/250 volts, marginal could be 106/212 volts to 127/254 volts.
      Out of those spec they act to correct it immediately.

  9. james says:

    Looks like DC fast charging is an upgrade as it states in the one video…. Kinda disappointing.

  10. wavelet says:

    The videos are obviously aimed at mainstream potential customers rather than just at EV supporters.
    I’m therefore encouraged simply by the fact that they exist — it’s an indication GM might try to actively market the Bolt to mainstream customers.

    1. Rightofthepeople says:

      Exactly! This was my first thought after watching only a few of the videos, and then I went on to watch them all and that thought was confirmed. GM marketing created these videos for people new to EVs, so they are targeting the mainstream market with this car. This is great news, and I think could lead to first year sales of the Bolt that far exceed GM’s expectations.

    2. Scott Franco says:

      If by mainstream you mean stupid people, I would have to agree. This is not a beginners market. The majority of EV users know about the limitations of even a DC fast charge at 50kW, so they are not going to be able to market against Tesla in any capacity except “we are first”.

      So running commercials for soccer moms getting their first EV is the way to go.

      1. wavelet says:

        Ignorant isn’t necessarily stupid.
        EVs are negligible in terms of their % of all cars on the roads (except possibly for Norway (-: ).
        Unless s/he personally knows someone who has one, even a reasonably educated person with no science/engineering background is unlikely to know anything about EVs… Except possibly some fact-poor article they read a few years ago.

        1. Weatherman says:

          And it’s the other 99% of the population that need this information, in this form. Even if Chevrolet wanted to land every EV enthusiast out there, it would only represent a very very tiny fraction of the population.

  11. PtG says:

    This is great news for Tesla, the EV market is real, and they have their first real competitor. Now I’m looking for the post that just gives the Bolt stats, how long to charge, 0-60 time, etc, without watching 10 GM commercials. Lol

  12. Peter says:

    400000 people will now think, damm for less range and less battery I must wait until 2018-2020. GM could do some good commercials aiming on Model 3 reservation holders. And until Model 3 comes, you can get a used Bolt for 25$ shines.

    1. Rick says:

      Until they see and touch it in person and realize it’s still a gm product.

      1. Aaron says:

        The Tesla Model ≡ has the potential to do more with less. How? Aerodynamics. The Bolt EV is a brick; the Model ≡ is not.

        While some energy can be returned as you slow down and brake thanks to regenerative braking, aerodynamic losses are permanent. You cannot get them back.

      2. lithium says:

        +1 Ever try getting a Volt serviced? The Bolt will be even worse. Clueless dealers with clueless service departments are the norm for GM.

        1. sven says:

          Well then its a good thing that Volt’s don’t need to be serviced anywhere near as often as a Model X or Model S. 😉

        2. Spider-Dan says:

          Why, yes, I have tried getting a Volt serviced. I’ve had two different Volts, in fact.

          When it comes to breakdowns and service, I can say a few definitive things about the Volt so far:

          1) Of the 7 Volts I’ve seen at my work since 2012, none of us have yet to have a problem that made the car undrivable.
          2) GM service has generally been very courteous and responsive.

          In the two cases where there were problems that took a while to solve (both on Gen2 Volts), GM corporate took extra measures to make it right; one person was cut a check equal to a monthly car payment (or given the option for a buyback), and the other person – me – was given an extra year of OnStar subscription (or the option of several hundred dollars of free accessories, which I wasn’t interested in).

        3. Raymond J Ramirez says:

          Seems as you had very bad experiences with your cars. I am a GM owner since 1974, and in 42 years I own only four GM cars, with ownership average of 15 years. My GM cars (Chevy, Oldsmobile, Buick, and Chevy) have been excellent, and easy to care. And my excellent GM dealer wants to sell the Volt but the regional GM office hasn’t allow them.

    2. Steven says:

      The bolt was promised to have over 200 miles of range. Tesla promised over 215 for the Model 3. I’m sure they’ll beat Chevy’s number. And they’re cheaper, not more expensive.

      1. Kdawg says:

        Tesla promises and $5 will buy you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

        1. mx9000 says:

          Tesla promises have built a company with $10 BILLION dollars in Assets.

      2. Josh says:

        The base model 3 probably won’t match the rated range of the Bolt. But the larger pack model 3 will have much higher range.

        Bolt looks to be the best value at this stage, but we still don’t know final details on Model 3 and Leaf 2.0.

        I am still probably going to wait for Model 3, but performance and rear wheel drive mean more to me than most people.

      3. Raymond J Ramirez says:

        Tesla promised the Model X in 2010 and at $40,000. Look it up! I bet you that the Model 3 will be overpriced, underpowered, and delayed, as the Model 2 and X have!.

  13. Terawatt says:

    Wow! I would love to be a fly on the wall in the various offices of car makers everywhere today! Not least at Tesla. They’ve been asking for competition all along, and here it is. And I’m sure they don’t intend to just roll over.

    I don’t think 238 EPA miles is possible from 60 kWh gross capacity. I suspect GM has been very cleverly speaking of only useable capacity all along! That matches up very well with the numbers we’ve now got.

    They are also showing that they’ve become good at Teslas own game. By giving just a little information and dropping a few hints – this time that price will actually be *below* $37,500 before incentives – they are generating speculation and excitement and will get another round of attention when they announce prices.

    So far the only disappointments are:

    1) DCFC port isn’t standard. This is frankly ridiculous. Even people who are sure they will never use it should get it – second hand value will more than pay for it (unless they charge a price totally out of kilt with the cost of providing one).

    2) DCFC appears to be 50 kW. Although it could be GM chooses to say you can replenish “about 90 miles in half an hour” (~50 kW) simply because you can’t really charge faster than 50 kW in the real world today anyway. So there’s still some hope.

    If the CCS port isn’t pricey it may still come in at or below $37,500 with DCFC, and then the weird choice to make it an option is pretty much irrelevant.

    Otherwise this really does look like a car that could succeed big time. It’s going to be incredibly interesting to see whether they manage to get the dealerships to do a decent job selling them. But if interest is as high as I think it will be, dealers will come around pretty fast. This will give them access to many new customers, and many of them quite affluent. It shouldn’t take long for them to understand where things are headed and what they need to do to prepare for an electric future!

    Another small fear is starting to make itself felt. Could GM actually succeed in breaking Tesla? And if they did, what would it mean for the future of EVs? I believe the answer is regulators will force the issue if need be, but it’s not easy to be sure.

    Can’t wait to hear Tesla’s reactions to this. Surely Musk must be peppered with questions on Twitter as I write this and can’t very well just ignore it all.

    1. bro1999 says:

      Yeah, slight bummer CCS isn’t standard, but we’ve pretty much known it will be an option for a while now. It’s a $750 option on a Spark EV, so not like it breaks the bank. I’ll get it for sure with my Bolt.

      I don’t think anyone was really expecting an overall range of 238. Even I thought 225 was optimistic.

      Elon has quite a bit of work to do. And that’s not even considering the SpaceX/Solar City junk he’s dealing with. That guy must never sleep, and now GM has just given him yet another thing to keep him up late at night.

      1. Stuart22 says:

        The past month or so has not been good for Elon. It’s like his world is imploding with all the issues he’s dealing with.

        And now the Bolt – better than was assumed. Way better. For the first time in his company’s history, he will be following another car company into a new market segment – a segment that he had expected to pioneer.

        He will be late by a year or more, and the big question is can he come up with a product equally compelling at the mid-30k price level that will make a profit? Unlike GM, his company does not have the depth of resources nor a profitable product portfolio as a fallback.

        He has proven he can come up with compelling products with six figure price tags, but at $35k? I think it will be a miracle if he can do it.

        1. Anti-Lord Kelvin says:

          Well, at least for the beauty part, the Model 3 is far better than the Bolt…
          For the new market segment you are right, but it will not be in the same new market segment than the Model 3. The market segment that the Model 3 is targetting is the market segment of an Electric BMW3 (when it will exist), an Electric Audi A4 (when it will exist) or of an Electric Mercedes class C or CLA (when they will exist).
          The Bolt segment would be the one of an Electric Citroen C4 Cactus (when it will exist), an Electric Peugeot 2008 (when it will exist), an Electric Renault Captur (when it will exist), or my Fiat 500L Electric (when it will exist)…

          1. Raymond J Ramirez says:

            Beauty is relative. Look at the Hummer! Many were purchased yet it is a ugly revamped Army truck. If you like by looks only I feel very sad for you and any wife you may be searching for.

        2. mx9000 says:

          The Model 3 is a 5 passenger sports car.
          The Bolt, isn’t.

          Get over it already.
          The Bolt will steal sales from Toyota, Honda and Nissan.
          They’re going to steal Zero sales from Tesla.

          1. Raymond J Ramirez says:

            The Bolt EV is a REAL (you can actually sit in it) 5-pasenger city car for every day driving. Sportscars are said to be “sexy” (using the tailpipe?) but only for weekends. What fool buys a “sportscar” and can’t drive it every day? The Bolt EV will sell thousands and beat Tesla Motors by 2018.

            1. Bill Howland says:

              Agreed Mr. Ramirez…

              All I know is that everyone who has test driven one likes it.

              The car, while maybe not Model Material, has a contempory modern ‘urban’ look to it that almost all people would be comfortable driving in.

              The ‘better than great’ driving range is assuredly giving people like Ghosn headaches.

        3. mx9000 says:

          Have you even looked at that Bolt suspension?
          It deserves a far better suspension for a $37,000 car.

          No one will be making that comment about the Tesla Model 3.

          1. Raymond J Ramirez says:

            No one can because it is a conceptual prototype, so it doesn’t exist yet!

      2. To me, watching the video on charging was interesting. I really think they left the door open to faster DCFC… they had a Charegpoint person stating the charging speed. I think that was pretty darn clever – the Chargepoint person quoted the charging times *their stations* can deliver. Chevy left the ultimate capability of the car left unstated…

    2. sven says:

      Terawatt said:
      “I don’t think 238 EPA miles is possible from 60 kWh gross capacity. I suspect GM has been very cleverly speaking of only useable capacity all along! That matches up very well with the numbers we’ve now got.”

      This screenshot from the Green Car Reports first drive seems to confirm your suspicions.

      1. Jay Cole says:

        Just to add in, that could include regen over the ~240 miles as well (depending on LG’s system)…which would not be inconsequential

        1. sven says:

          Ahhh. Good point. I didn’t think of that. Those numbers were so darn close to 238 miles and 60 kWh that it didn’t occur to me that regen kWh would be included in the Energy Used figure.

          1. Raymond J Ramirez says:

            All hybrids and EVs have regeneration, and all use it during any road test, so it is included. The only way you can get non-regen miles is to drive it on a fixed road and never stopping until the battery charge is used up. Someone did this with a Chevy Spark EV and got 139 miles out of it! If the Chevy Bolt EV did the same, it can get over 300 miles.

  14. theflew says:

    Anyone notice how Chargepoint was featured in those videos? Make you wonder if there is going to be some type of announcement about expanding their network.

    1. bro1999 says:

      Yeah, I also noticed that. Don’t think it was just some coincidence.

  15. Vexar says:

    The lead engineer in the second video said “gas pedal” repeatedly. Way to muck up your launch by sounding like an idiot. 238 EPA estimate not official rating. I think there’s a difference. I find nothing at this site:

    about the Bolt. When I find it there, I’ll feel better about a rating, not an estimate. EPA doesn’t estimate, they rate. Right?

    1. Ash09 says:

      To be fair though, these videos are targeted towards non-EV owners. While the “gas pedal” has other names, that’s the one most people will recognize when he mentions it.

      Regarding the EPA range, I don’t think GM would’ve used it, if that’s not what the EPA rated it at. Remember how Ford got in trouble when people said they couldn’t get that 47 mpg the C-max hybrid was supposed to have gotten? Then they had to downgrade it twice, which was pretty embarrassing for them and probably hurt their EV cred a little.

      The EPA estimate for the Volt has been pretty spot on, but many owners have been able to get better range due to not driving it with a lead foot, and braking at the last second at a light.

      So I’m sure most average drivers will be able to attain that 238 miles, but most can probably hit 250 pretty easily except in extremely hot or cold climates.

    2. bro1999 says:

      Duh, of course it’s an estimate. Actual range will depend on how it’s driven, weather conditions, etc.

      EPA doesn’t guarantee you’ll get 238 miles no matter what. Hence, it’s “estimated”.

    3. bro1999 says:

      All range figures on for all vehicles listed as “EPA range estimate”. Read it and weep.

      1. Vexar says:

        Weep for joy, I hope you mean. I simply want to know whether the estimate on will be the same because of what’s happened in the past with those numbers. You may recall in 2010-2011 that Tesla Motors was estimating 265 wh/mile and eventually got to 300 wh/mile when they were rated with the EPA, giving the vintage Model S 60 an EPA rated range of 208 miles. That’s about a 13% difference in range figures.

        Yeah, GM competing with Tesla on range figures is a win, all around. The Volt-B buyers will have a greater amount of range than they expected, and the Model III owners can expect a battery range upgrade (software limited) if the EPA rating on the Model III is below 238.
        For the folks who just canceled your Model III reservation, you forgot about part 2 of the Model III announcement.
        As for the gas pedal lingo, well, that’s right up there with miles per gallon.

        1. PHEVfan says:

          The EPA number comes from the manufacturer, not the EPA. The manufacturer does the testing. What GM announced today was the number from their testing that will be reported to the EPA and thus wind up on the site.

    4. Kdawg says:

      ” Way to muck up your launch by sounding like an idiot.”

      That’s Josh Tavel. He comes from a racing background, so I can see why he uses the term gas-pedal. I’ve owned an EV for 4 years and still say gas-pedal sometimes.

      Also, that video is actually a bit old, so not really a “launch” video.

    5. Stuart says:

      ‘Gas pedal’ is ok.

      Beautiful gas pedal, lift foot, puts gas back in tank!

  16. Michael Will says:

    It’s awesome that GM seems all in on this and it may bring more new customers to embrace electric driving. It’s no threat to tesla, rather a validation of what they are about.

    The features model 3 will have over the bolt are going to cost a lot extra but also have significant value, so it’s a different market segment.

    The base model will likely include a similar range as the Bolt and look more like a Porsche but charge premium for the advanced features that come standard in the model s:

    Adaptive cruise control / autopark / autopilot
    Supercharger access
    Higher range options

    Can’t wait to test drive the bolt but also can’t wait to see the next reveal of model 3. And am counting myself lucky to be in the early 100,000s of reservations

  17. John says:

    It’s funny to me how as EV’s become mainstream they have tutorials for all the many formerly naysaying masses who are now going to adopt the EV lifestyle. All us owners who have slogged through the 60-70 mile real mile Leaf ownership for the last few years, learning how to get very creative and breaking trail for those same naysayers will now get to hear and experience, once again for the first time, all the awakening of the Born-Agains, who will clog the chargers and talk like they’ve been there for years…

    That being said I’m still glad with where we’re at, but I though I would just point that out..

    1. Kdawg says:

      The day Neil Cavuto says “This plug-in car is awesome!”, is the day we can fly the “mission accomplished” banner 🙂

    2. SparkEV says:

      Unless Chevy does stupid thing “no charge to charge” like Nissan / BMW, DCFC will not be clogged. Vast majority of waiting for DCFC is for those who get free charging.

      If anything, Bolt will rarely need to use DCFC. If enough people move away from Nissan / BMW NCTC programs to Bolt, we who drive 80 miles range EV will see fewer waits at DCFC.

  18. Dave says:

    I think it’s great! I’m only one potential customer (on my 2nd Volt), but this is exactly the range I was looking for. I have a 40 mile daily round trip commute and a trip up north 160 miles one way about every other weekend, where I can charge on Level 2. My mother is 100 miles away, so I could round trip there, as needed.

    1. Dave says:

      FYI, for me, any travel for distances farther than 160 miles is why there are airlines.

      1. Anti-Lord Kelvin says:

        My nearest airport is at 110 miles from where I’m living , so….

  19. marcel_g says:

    that range would be more than adequate for any long distance travelling I’d be likely to do, so this is putting the Bolt at the top of my list, competing with the LEAF.

    When I’m travelling with my family, we rarely drive more than 2 hours at a stretch, as someone will invariably need to use the bathroom. On top of that, if a stop includes a meal, it takes at least 45 minutes anyway.

    It’s unlikely we’d need to go more than 330 miles on a trip, so the Bolt, even with not-supercharger DC fast charging, would be more than adequate.
    Eg. The first stretch would use 220 – 120 = 100 miles left. Stop for lunch, charge back 90-120 miles, and back on the road with ~200 miles of range. After the second stretch range is 200 – 120 = 80 miles remaining, with 90 miles left to go on the trip. Charge for 20 minutes, add ~60 miles, and have 140 miles of range to cover the remaining 90 miles of travel. All good.

    With the LEAF, the 30 kwh model wouldn’t work well in this scenario, so I’m either waiting for the 2017 model announcement, or factoring in renting a gas mobile for trips. It’s still competitive, since the LEAF is currently much cheaper to lease here in Ontario than the Volt, so it’ll be cheaper to lease than a Bolt.

  20. mustang_sallad says:

    None of these videos highlight how awesome it is to be able to charge at home. Strange choice.

    1. Dave says:

      Spot on! One of the best benefits of driving EV.

  21. jim stack says:

    They cover a lot of questions very well. Adding to how long will the batteries last the Volt and SPARK EV have shone no loss in 3 or more years even in HOT Phoenix. So it looks like a 20-30 year battery life is expected.

  22. Koenigsegg says:

    Lol @ the ads

  23. Foo says:

    I’m not sure if the “How long does the battery last?” bullet is supposed to appear twice in the list, but that was funny when I read it.

  24. Emma says:

    I would like to see a GM video on “how far can you go in a snowstorm with temps below 0”

    1. Raymond J Ramirez says:

      My reply would be “Nowhere. I stay at home.”. But where I live, I never get snow so I don’t care about snowstorms anymore, and any EV I buy will give me the maximum range every day of the year.

  25. Bill Howland says:

    Actually, in very cold weather, both my volt and ELR are quite surprizing.

    One trick I learned in moderately cold weather. If you have time, turn the car on in the garage for 30 minutes to let the 2 kw (or whatever it is) warm the battery first while still plugged in. You will get an extra kwh of battery range that way.

  26. JimGord says:

    GM just cannot bring themselves to say that EVS are good for the environment and might help to save the biosphere for our children.

    Instead they say EVs (the Bolt) is good for anyone who is “mindful and wants to be decidedly progressive”