Volkswagen Announces Addition Of Cheaper $29,815, Entry-Level e-Golf For 2016


2015 VW e-Golf ...  Complete With Over-The-Top EV Badging

VW e-Golf

Volkswagen announced its 2016 lineup, which in the US will include a new entry level e-Golf.

From the start, Volkswagen offered only one SEL trim (details) with a lot of standard features like LED headlights, heat-pump, 7.2 kW on-board charger, DC fast charging inlet, aluminum-alloys wheels, rearview camera… for $35,445 plus $820 destination charge.

There was an experiment with a $2,000 cheaper “Limited Edition” earlier this year (details). This trim didn’t have heat-pump, LED lights, aluminum-alloys wheels nor leatherette seating surfaces.

For the 2016 model year, Volkswagen brings the SE entry level trim.

The most important differences are related to charging – 3.6 kW on-board charger instead of 7.2 kW, and no DC fast charging. Both features will be available in an optional DC Fast Charging Package. SE touchscreen will be smaller (6.5-inch instead of 8-inch in SEL).

As for pricing, here’s where the e-Golf SE shines. With a starting price of $29,815 (including $820 for destination), this entry-level model undercuts the $29,860 2015 Leaf S (including $850 for destination).

Best of all, lease rates for the e-Golf SE start at $199 a month:

“Lowering the cost of entry to Volkswagen e-mobility, the new 2016 e-Golf SE offers most of the features of the SEL Premium model and includes a 3.6 kW onboard charger as standard. A new available DC Fast Charging Package adds the 7.2 kW onboard charger with DC Fast Charging. Pricing will start at $28,995, with a $199 lease price, fully competitive with the Nissan Leaf S.”

Taking direct aim at the Nissan LEAF S.


  • New value-oriented SE model
  • MIB II infotainment system with USB and VW Car-Net App-Connect
  • New Driver Assistance Package (Late availability)

Lowering the cost of entry to e-mobility, the 2016 e-Golf SE offers most of the features of the SEL Premium model. A 3.6 kW onboard charger is standard, but the DC Fast Charging Package (late availability) adds the 7.2 kW onboard charger with DC Fast Charging.

Both e-Golf models get MIB II infotainment systems; SE models feature a 6.5-inch touchscreen, and SEL Premium models have an 8-inch touchscreen. A new Driver Assistance Package, which includes Forward Collision Warning and Autonomous Emergency Braking (Front Assist) and Parking Steering Assistant (Park Assist), is available on SEL Premium.”

Category: VW


96 responses to "Volkswagen Announces Addition Of Cheaper $29,815, Entry-Level e-Golf For 2016"
  1. LusTuCCC says:

    Electrics are not expensive to build, if it’s done at large scale like other models.
    Actually they require much less parts, less manpower, less subcontracting, transport etc.

    1. Pedro says:

      Correct. The truth is they don’t want to sell electric cars.

    2. ModernMarvelFan says:

      “Electrics are not expensive to build, if it’s done at large scale like other models”

      Speaking like a true “average joe” who is NOT an engineer.

      The biggest misconception is that how expensive ICE powertrain. It is NOT. Despite more moving parts, those parts are mass produced very cheaply.

      EV powertrain might look simpler (it is), but its expensive part are NOT just battery. High power electronic controller are very expensive, espcially when they are rated to work with 100s of kW in power. Those high power IGBTs and Power MOSFETs aren’t cheap to make.

      “Average joe” thinks since those ICs are ICs so they must be like computer chips so higher volume will be cheaper to make. It is NOT. IC cost goes down with scale due to the fact that when you cut a wafer into smaller pieces, you generate more ICs per wafer which lower your cost. By reducing power consumption and sizes, you generate more performance for lower cost. Thus the “Moore’s law”.

      But for higher power ICs, it only follows that model somewhat to a point. Once those power ICs reaches small size, you reach a limit of the power handling capability for a given material. If the ICs are too small, it won’t be able to handle the high voltage requirement and the thermal dissipation required. So, the cost reduction aren’t nearly as fast as your average electronics.

      Those higher power controllers can easily cost way more than the EV motors and cost way more than ICE transmission in general to make.

      Until there is a major material breakthrough (maybe carbon nano tubes), it just won’t be cheap to make them.

      Look up all the motor controllers and see how much they cost.

      In fact, also look up all the inverters for the solar industry and see how much just a 3kW or 6kW solar inverter cost…

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        ModernMarvelFan said:

        “High power electronic controller are very expensive, espcially when they are rated to work with 100s of kW in power. Those high power IGBTs and Power MOSFETs aren’t cheap to make.”

        That reminds me of what was claimed by manufacturers of the first VCRs. “VCRs are complex electro-mechanical devices”, they said. “They won’t drop in price like consumer electronics have.” We paid $1200 for our first top-loader VCR. Of course, you can now easily find VCRs for less than $100.

        ModernMarvelFan, if you think prices on inverters and other power electronics for EVs won’t drop quickly and very substantially once high-volume production goes into effect… well, as I said, critical thinking isn’t your forte.

        1. Bill Howland says:

          MMF is accurate a far higher percentage of the time than you are. I’d be a bit shy to criticize him, but then thats not you. You don’t care if you have the facts or not (you are typically clueless, and when its pointed out to you, you just say, well, I’m not in the business).

          The point is, the expensive devices ALREADY have greatly come down in price and they are STILL expensive on an absolute scale.

          Its rather like waiting for 26 cents a gallon gasoline. You’ll be waiting a long time for it.

        2. ModernMarvelFan says:

          “ModernMarvelFan, if you think prices on inverters and other power electronics for EVs won’t drop quickly and very substantially once high-volume production goes into effect… well, as I said, critical thinking isn’t your forte.”

          Hey PuPu, do we need to remind you that if you like to insult me you should at least get a graduate degree in EE first?

          I already explained to you the differenc between the IC used in power application vs. low power electronic. Maybe you didn’t understand that since you never had an EE background or IC background.

          Here is a quick summery training for you on IC manufaucturing. Consumer electronic got cheaper over time by increased volume (to reduce capital investment cost) and reducing IC size so each wafer can be cut into more smaller chips.

          In power ICs, the increased volume will redce the cost of capital equipment, but IC sizes are harder to reduce to heat and power handling, thus there is a limit on how cheap those power ICs.

          No, I am NOT lacking critical thinking at all. I just have fundamental EE knowledge that average joe doesn’t.

      2. SparkEV says:

        Not quite true on cost of electronics. It’s expensive to make it faster, but power at low frequency (under 1MHz) is cheap. For example, IRFP250 is rated 200V and 30A and cost $1 ($2 in ones and twos from Digikey).

        That’s 6kW. Assuming overdesign by 100%, that’s 3kW peak or 1.9 kW for continuous 90% efficient design. 33 of those would cost $33, and provide 100 kW. At this point, much of the cost is design (NRE, non-recurring engineering). With mass production and wider knowledge base, electronics prices will come down.

        Oh how I wish I have the money to make my own EV…

        1. Bill Howland says:

          What total nonsense!

          I love it when people try to get specific on here because it shows how clueless they really are, no offense…

          Tell me, how many devices does it take to make a 4 – quadrant, 3 – phase bridge, if you even know what that is and why it is required. In addition there is the cooling requirement, and the device dissipation at operating conditions.

          The other big mistake you are making is assuming that peak voltage and peak current can occur at the same time. Or, that the device is only subjected to battery voltage and not the counter-emf of the motor, or even inductors/capacitors in the drive itself..

          Now it is possible to make a small bicycle drive using just one Hexfet. But you also need a fast-switching diode, inductor, heat sink and controls. But its not gonna run a chevy volt.

          1. SparkEV says:

            You’re making EV electronics to be some magic. That isn’t the case. Tell me, if it isn’t collection of FET (or IGBT) devices, how would you make 100kW controller? It’s amazing how people throw around terms as if it’s magic with stupid comments, no offense.

            1. Bill Howland says:

              Its a collection of hexfets and Schotkey diodes, amoungst other things. The reason for the relatively high speed devices is to minimize the turn on and turn off losses.

              My comment was not stupid, and you know that.

              But to avoid a silly back and forth such as other groups of commenters have here, if you claim you can make a 100 kw controller (or ANY controller, for that matter) for $33 – please do it. And when you have the conversion car done using your $33 device, I’ll be the first one to congratulate you.

              1. SparkEV says:

                If there’s guaranteed order for 1 Billion such units, I’ll gladly design a 100KW EV controller for $33 (or less, depending on topology) for total power devices. Others, such as controller and sensors and software (or RTL) will add few bucks more, total electronics BOM cost less than $500.

                Your comment was stupid, because it’s like saying EV will never be practical because battery costs $1000/kWh back in 2005. You throw out topology as if that’s some magic end-all-be-all “I know more than you” cost limit while completely ignoring the comment was regarding power semiconductor cost and economy of scale.

                1. ModernMarvelFan says:

                  “I’ll gladly design a 100KW EV controller for $33 (or less, depending on topology) for total power devices”

                  Please do!

                  I can’t wait for that.

                  In fact, I will give you even $333 for 100kW. Let us see the design please…

                  1. SparkEV says:

                    Please send $500 billion so I can get started.

                  2. SparkEV says:

                    I haven’t heard from you regarding the NRE needed to get started for optimized EV controller.

                    At the simplest “braindead” level, take 100 IRFP250 and 100 1kW electric bicycle motors, and you have 100 kW motor + controller with semiconductor cost in neighborhood of $200 (or $100 in quantity). Bill Howland could fill you in the details as he said single Hexfet could be used for electric bicycle; just use 100 of them in parallel.

                    Instead of sending me $333 for this design, please donate to Foster dog / Foster cat organiztion. Thank you.

        2. ModernMarvelFan says:

          So, you think parallel/series a bunch of 3kW power ICSs will work for a 300kW inverters?

          LOL. OKay, I guess I won’t have the time to do the EE 101 lesson here… It will take too long.

          1. Bill Howland says:

            MMF is there anything I’ve said here that is wrong?? Is there anything that theyve said that is right?

            1. ModernMarvelFan says:

              What you said are pretty right on…

              The biggest problem is that people think all power ICs are the same as traditional digital ICs where it will get cheaper by volume. It only does somewhat. The higher volume will decrease equipment cost that manufacture the IC which leads to slightly lower IC cost, but it doesn’t solve the IC problem by itself.

              In some applications, stacking lower power ICs will work for higher voltage requirement. But the problem with that approach is far more complext control to turn on those gates at the same time when stacked. Also, the amount of heat dissipation and packaging issue will start to become a bigger mess.

              Fast switching speed is also very criticial. The size of the motors are inverse to the square of the switching frequency. So, the higher the switching frequency, the smaller the rest of the components (to a point until the switching loss becomes a big factor). You want to spend as little time switching as possible to reduce switching loss which adds up in high power applications.

              Now, the common issues that most people ignore is thermal and packaging which are closely related to the size of the IC and type of the IC itself.

              The way to significantly improve them is to find new material (maybe carbon nano tube) that can handle higher power with smaller package which will lead to signficantly breakthrough and cost reduction.

              Until them, the improvement in power IC today are far cry from the speed of consumer electronic ICs…

              Also, using a stack of 33 power IC pretty much increased your failure rate by at least 1 magnitude compared with 1 power IC assume same technology and derating.

              1. Bill Howland says:

                Ok well, I still haven’t heard what I wanted to hear, namely:

                1). It takes a minimum of 12 devices to make a 4 quadrant bridge – the 4 is forward hawling, reverse hawling, forward overhawling and revers overhawling. And the current runs through more than one device.

                2). Nobody is talking about the Safe Operating Area of the device, or even the peak dissipation.

          2. SparkEV says:

            Lol. So what you’re saying is 300kW inverter uses single device? No wonder your world view has no hope of coming down in price. This post is indeed too short for EE lesson.

            Fact is, current off the shelf devices can (and do) provide 100kW (or 300kW) by using bunch of them (mostly parallel). Packaging and thermal considerations for them are not optimal as they are commodity items. Once mass production orders are made, there are many ways to optimize.

            One example would be to have no packaging, but connect directly to heat sink / bus bar. That will eliminate at least 2 (or more) thermal discontinuities. By not having individual packaging, it will lower cost and increase performance.

            In fact, I can think of at least half a dozen ways to optimize silicon off the top of my head, from switching time to triggering to die topology to etching techniques to annealing. They all will reduce cost, but they need to be designed, simulated, prototyped and manufactured. None of that will require exotic materials breakthrough.

            Just because you can’t think of ways to optimize doesn’t mean it can’t or won’t happen. You could have some credibility if EV market is 50% (or even 20%) total cars sales. But when EV sales are in noise of other car sales, saying anything about high cost is nonsense except regard to raw material cost. I read Li battery raw material costs about $100/kWh, and I expect Li battery prices to reflect that eventually. For sand (Silicon), prices could be practically free. But I give an example from today’s 6kW peak device (IRFP250).

    3. miggy says:

      Nice to have the choice, now you need to push VW to bring in the VW Golf GTE as well.
      You already have the Audi A3 E-Tron but why not have the choice of all three plus the BMW’s.

  2. Brian says:

    This is excellent news! The more plug-ins below $30k the better. People will start seeing them on car searchs and realize they aren’t just $100k “toys for the rich” nor just “golf carts”.

    1. Heisenberght says:

      Yes, the common practice how people select price search filters is a good argument.

      Even if some people will later decide for the higher trim levels, a low entry price can definitely attract possible customers.

      I really hope that this will push ev-market a little.

      And don’t forget the pressure they put on competitors.

      btw.: The two e-cars I spotted yesterday were: e-up (entry level) an Tesla S (rich-toy-level) both of them made me smile because the were so f****** silent!

      Imagine a world where you can talk to the person next to you in a normal voice even when you are close to a busy street. Wonderful!

    2. Bill Howland says:

      Brian, this news is going to drive Clarkson Cote nuts.

      A few months back I was tongue-in-cheek stating the trend in car chargers was to more modern smaller chargers, not larger, since this Howland dude went from a car with 70 amp charging to 15.

      Now, VW has halved the size of their most modern charger..

      I do like the low price.. Just wish it had about 3X the battery…

      I’m waiting for a BOLT. No-one else seems to be trying what GM is trying to do, not even Tesla will be able to match their pricing.

      1. Anon says:

        Agree, but from the context of it being unliklely that Tesla will take the same cheap shortcuts to produce another electric vehicle (converted Sonic ICE platform) that GM is historically known for… The Tesla will M3 will likely be the better value.

      2. ClarksonCote says:

        Haha! 🙂

      3. SparkEV says:

        Actually, I like the battery size. At $100/kWh that Li battery is expected to reach due to raw material prices, 25kWh would be about $2500 to replace. If the battery size is 3X bigger, it would be $7500 to replace. After 10 years, I doubt many people would want to spend $7500 to “fix” such old car. $2500 is more palatable, roughly the cost of gas car maintenance / repair. Throwing away a perfectly good EV, because battery replacement cost is too high isn’t good.

        Rather than bigger battery, I hope they can find ways to reduce or keep the raw material cost the same and extend the range.

    3. Speculawyer says:

      Yep. Below $30K makes them below the cost of an average car.

      The problem is that these are still ~80 mile econoEVs. But as a second car or for someone with access to ZIPcar or other car-sharing service, they work just fine.

  3. Fool Cells says:

    just needs double the range.

    1. vdiv says:

      In that spirit skimming on the charging capabilities seems counterproductive. If this is intended as a commuter vehicle, then why not bring the E-Up! to the US.

    2. Byron says:

      just need to add an Rex 😉

      1. Anon says:

        Data shows PHEVs just make people burn –MORE– gas and drive more often than they normally would. Hybrids do NOT solve the excess carbon emission problem.

        1. vin says:

          Can you please provide a link to that data? Thanks!

          1. ModernMarvelFan says:

            It must be from “Anon’s imaginery database” built from using PHEV hating thought…

            1. Bill Howland says:

              I don’t know anyone who owns a chevy volt who uses more gasoline than the totally gasoline powered car it replaced. I’m down to about 10% of my traditional gasoline usage.

              Now my ELR is obviously using a bit more gas than the Roadster it replaced, for obvious reasons.

              But I don’t understand his comment in the first place since the E-GOLF is a total BEV.

              1. SparkEV says:

                Shame on you for replacing the Roadster! 😉

                But I salute you for actually having owned one.

                There was a study that showed Prius drive more, but that was before 2010. I don’t know of any regarding ER or BEV. I suspect people won’t drive as much with plug-in vehicle if battery range is “substantial” (ie, 30+ miles), ER or otherwise. They would’ve simply bought Prius instead. Just my speculation.

          2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            vin said:

            “Can you please provide a link to that data? Thanks!”

            His statement is very likely true for mild hybrids, but probably not for PHEVs in general, and certainly not the Volt.

            I don’t know about actual data regarding mild hybrids, but in general it’s a well-established although counter-intuitive principle that increasing efficiency increases use of a resource (such as gasoline/diesel), rather than decreasing it. Increasing efficiency encourages more use, and increases it faster than it saves using the resource. This is called the Jevons paradox (source 1).

            The reason that doesn’t hold for the Volt is, I think, primarily because most Volt owners are actually dedicated to the principle of avoiding use of gasoline as much as possible, even to the point of stopping to recharge en route more often than Leaf owners (source 2).

            source 1:

            source 2:

            1. ModernMarvelFan says:

              “His statement is very likely true for mild hybrids, but probably not for PHEVs in general, and certainly not the Volt.”

              In INL’s recent study, both Prius Plugin and Ford C-Max Energi owners also drove significant EV miles (NOT as high as the Volt owners, but 25-35% of total).

              That is still significant gas miles reduction, unlike the “unfounded” statement by Anon.

        2. David Murray says:

          That is exactly opposite of what every research I’ve read on the topic says.

          1. ClarksonCote says:

            Yup, a Volt travels more electric miles per year than a Leaf. Anon is spouting FUD.

  4. kdawg says:

    So how much is the DC Fast Charging Package?

  5. mr. M says:

    first SEL
    second SE
    third S?

    1. vdiv says:

      fourth, just ? 😉

      1. mr. M says:

        lol, you got me! 🙂

  6. Bonaire says:

    Still waiting on the Bolt. 85 mile range of the e-Golf is a bit low for a big suburban area. Price of Bolt should be nearly the same.

    But someone please make a $25K before incentives BEV with 90 mile range. I hope eventually to see 200 mile range for under $25K. I can afford a Tesla but the point of sustainability is not spending all your money on a depreciating object.

    1. ffbj says:

      True, though in comparison to other vehicles they retain a larger percentage of their value.

      1. ziv says:

        I am starting to see Teslas advertized for $53k so you can probably get an S for just under $50k. Give it another year….
        The down side of buying a 4 or 5 year old S would be the realization that if you hold onto it for long, you will probably be buying another pack. I am not sure how that will work. I understand what will happen with a Volt, but I haven’t read how Tesla will handle it. Hopefully the packs will still have 80% of original AER at 10 years, or 120,000 miles.

      2. Ziv says:

        Uhm… My other post should say “I am starting to see USED Teslas for $53k”. Just to be clear. LOL!

  7. ffbj says:

    Problem being is that most want most of that stuff. Why are led lights so expensive? I mean leds are cheap?

    1. MTN Ranger says:

      Really? When I go to the store I see $.50 incandescent light bulbs and $10 LED bulbs.

    2. ModernMarvelFan says:

      “Why are led lights so expensive? I mean leds are cheap?”

      Because of the LED drive circuits and optical support.

      Or it is common for people to ask why are EVs so expensive when EV motors are so cheap…

  8. Mister G says:

    Put your money where your mouth is and get a Tesla..stop making excuses.

    1. Jelloslug says:

      I have just about come to terms with that myself….

    2. mr. M says:

      Wow, your comment makes a lot of sense.

      Jup, i will put down my average 10.000 € that i paid for my average car. Oh, no tesla affordable? Since the tesla is a high desirable car, i would pay double of that: 20.000 €. Still no tesla affordable? Great an now???

      Seems like i have to wait till 2022 till the used Model 3 drops enough in price. And please dont make such stupid comments until then.

  9. Phatcat73 says:

    Awesomeness! I imagine Nissan will respond accordingly with their 2016 lineup. Hopefully VW releases the car to more US States

  10. David Murray says:

    The poor Leaf is just getting attacked from all directions. Nissan had better hurry up with that battery pack. I’m starting to worry they don’t have it ready.

    1. Bonaire says:

      The e-Golf looks like a nice design for general car design. The Leaf is a little too Japan-design oriented.

      1. Koenigsegg says:

        E-Golf looks as generic as it can get, there is nothing about it that makes me want it

        1. vdiv says:

          Have you driven it? If it wasn’t for the fake engine noise and lame infotainment screen I was very close to getting one.

          1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            Can’t you turn off the fake ICEngine noise?

            1. vdiv says:

              For the hour or so I spent with the car I did not find a way to turn it off. Maybe people who drive one can opine. 🙂

              1. ModernMarvelFan says:

                Can you download a different engine noise?

                It would have been cool if I can play the noise from a Ferrari or Porsche instead… =)

                1. Ziv says:

                  I was driving down a 4 lane road in the right lane and a Leaf was ahead of me in the left lane. As we braked and accelerated I could hear the sound of a 5.0 liter Mustang just behind me in my blind spot. But it sounded like it was the Leaf making that raspy rumble. Made me laugh. But it also reminded me of how much I miss the sound of my 350Z when I am driving my Volt.

        2. Stimpy says:

          It’s far better looking that the alien spacepod that is the Leaf. My god, those headlights…

          1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            The Leaf is a bug-eyed monster! 😀

  11. Lou Grinzo says:

    Cheaper EV from an established car company? Thank you, and more, please.

    But they may regret the timing on this announcement. We’ve yet to hear the pricing on the 2016 Leafs, and my guess is that the SV and SL, with the 25% larger batteries, will hold the line, and the S, with the same size pack as the 2015, will see a substantial price cut. I think this is likely for three reasons:

    1. General competitive pressure.

    2. The S was effectively reduced by $3,500 to $5,000 for something like 6 months via various NMAC promotions. I doubt Nissan was losing money on all those units.

    3. With the bigger packs in the SV and SL, Nissan likely feels they have to create a bigger price spread between the S and the upper trim levels. They can’t increase the price of the SV and SL, so the S has to get cheaper if they’re to widen the gap.

    My guess: The 2016 S is priced at $24,995 before any incentives, and it won’t be long before VW is running some sort of promotion to close the price gap.

  12. eco Logical says:

    Except for Tesla, all the BEVs are wagons! I hate wagons, the rear window gets mucked up and the aerodynamics are poor (and therefore range for same kWh battery), not to mention the fact that there is no trunk so all your stuff is on display for thieves to see.

    1. ModernMarvelFan says:

      What is a difference between a wagon and hatchback as far as your complain of visibility of the storage go?

      Model S is a hatchback.

      1. eco Logical says:

        Model S has a ‘Frunk’ to hide valuables!

        1. ModernMarvelFan says:

          Sure, but it is still a hatchback… for the rear visibility issue.

          If “hiding” things from prying eyes are what you care about, then maybe you need a car with larger glove box or center consoles then.

          1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

            ModernMarvelFan said:

            “Sure, but it is still a hatchback… for the rear visibility issue.”

            Hardly. Tesla could easily have put a standard trunk lid on the Model S, behind/below the rear window, just like a typical sedan, even though it is a “fastback” design.

            I presume the reason Tesla put a hatchback onto its hatchback sedan was for convenience. It’s certainly easier and more convenient to move luggage and cargo into and out of the rear storage and trunk areas with a hatchback than it is with a traditional trunk lid.

            ModernMarvelFan, you should consider taking a remedial course in critical thinking.

            1. ModernMarvelFan says:

              “ModernMarvelFan, you should consider taking a remedial course in critical thinking.”

              Was that necessary?

              Since you were someone can’t even do basic math in counting the gear complexity between a Voltec and a multi speed transmission, do I even need to explain to you the technical points here?

              Get an engineering degree before you post anymore none-sense.

              As I said before, if you play nice, I play nice. If you don’t, I won’t be nice either.

      2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        ModernMarvelFan said:

        “Model S is a hatchback.”

        The Tesla Model S does not fit the category of two-door cars described as “hatchbacks”.

        The Model S has a hatchback, but it’s a sedan. It is more accurately described as a hatchback sedan. Note in that term, “hatchback” is an adjective, not a noun.

        1. miggy says:

          The correct term for a Model S would be a lift-back.

    2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      eco Logical said:

      “Except for Tesla, all the BEVs are wagons!”

      I’m pretty sure nobody makes a BEV station wagon.

      Let’s review the difference between a sedan, a station wagon, and the type of car called a “hatchback”. See graphic here:

      The Tesla Model S has a hatchback, but it’s not “a hatchback”. It’s a sedan, or more precisely a hatchback sedan.

      1. ModernMarvelFan says:

        “Very similar is the “fastback”. Liftback is not used as a term in the UK — fastback or hatchback are used instead.”

        Quote from the same wiki page you provided.

        You should read your own reference before you complain about other people’s statement.

        Just like the our disussion on transmisson complexity. Or even better, get an engineering degree first..

    3. FocusEV says:

      The Focus has a cover that comes down with the hatch to block the view of whatever you are storing in the hatch. I frequently “hide” valuables in there when I need to stop by the store on my way home.

  13. Steve Z1 says:

    If VW were to have made a national availability announcement, this would be real news, until such time they just sell this car to CARB mandate states and worse limit service to only those states stories like this just make the rest of us feel like VW is just selling these for mandate purposes only.

  14. Lou says:

    For someone out here in the Northeast, I can’t see getting the E-Golf with the lower charging capability and no QC and no heat pump. We don’t have the charging infrastructure here that exists in CA, so you might find yourself stuck and looking for a Level III station to get the juice you need. The 7.2 on board charger would allow you to charge up at what, 25 miles per hour?A lot better than simply adding 10 miles per hour. Same thing for the heat pump, which I think is not included with the newest trim level. EV’s use so much electricity heating the cabin in cold weather, that I cannot picture anyone declining that option here. In CA and warmer climates, may not be such a big deal.

  15. vin says:

    How much is the drive-off for that $199/mo lease? If it’s competitive with the LEAF S, I suspect it’s around $2500, and has a 12K mi/yr allowance.

    Folks in CA that find the reported lease terms for this SE model attractive should look at what some of the dealers in CA have been offering on the LE and SEL models. Keeping track of these dealer offers on a weekly basis:

    One dealer is currently offering a SEL for $189/mo and $2500 down on a 3 yr lease, 7500 mi/yr… I suspect upping that to a 12000 mi/yr allowance would increase the payment by maybe $40/mo, but that’s still a great deal over a LEAF S or e-Golf SE if QC, faster L2 charging, LED lights, etc are important to you.

  16. Mike I says:

    As an e-Golf owner, I see a couple mistakes in this article.

    1. The SEL has leatherette seats and the Limited Edition (LE) has cloth seats.
    2. The LE was not an “experiment” it was planned from the start for “Late Availability” and continues to be available in significant numbers.
    3. The LE deleted some other features like the steering wheel controls, which also served to completely delete Cruise Control. The manual shows cruise control buttons on one of the stalks that are not actually present in the car in either trim level.

    I think the e-Golf SE will be very much like the Leaf S – crippled charging that will result in most of the cars of that trim level being equipped with the optional charging package. The end result is that VW will get to advertise a low starting price that a very small percentage of cars will actually have.

  17. Terry says:

    You are right LusTuccc. EVs should be cheaper to make. The Volt should be more expensive than Focus EV not the same price. Or Focus EV more than Volt. There are a lot more moving parts in ICE vehicle engine and transmissions. Actually the Tesla vehicles should be cheaper than a lot of the high end gas guzzlers. However with Tesla you get about the best service and free charging network. GM really needs to look at this charging network if GM wants this Bolt EV to really sell. Also with Tesla is the best accident ratings for safety according to Consumer protection

    1. ModernMarvelFan says:

      “There are a lot more moving parts in ICE vehicle engine and transmissions.”

      Why do people equal more parts to more cost?

      Does your computer motherboard cost more than the office chairs you sit on? Computer motherboard certain have way more parts. They are selling in the similar magnitude of volumes.

      Does ball point pen cost more than your pencil or mechanical pencil? it depends, doesn’t it? Both have similar volume…

      Does your digital camera cost more than your film camera to make with more parts inside?

      More parts don’t equal to more cost if they aren’t the same part to begin with…

      Ever compared the cost between a bearing and a 100kW Inverter?

      1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

        ModernMarvelFan said:

        “Why do people equal more parts to more cost?”

        Because, in general, it’s true. For example, the primary reason for the very high cost of rocket launch vehicles is because of the excessive number of parts. As pointed out in “LEO on the Cheap” (link below), significantly reducing the number of parts would be a way to substantially reduce costs… which is exactly what SpaceX is doing.

        ModernMarvelFan continued:

        “Does your computer motherboard cost more than the office chairs you sit on? Computer motherboard certain have way more parts. They are selling in the similar magnitude of volumes.”

        Seriously, you’re comparing manufacturing computer chips to manufacturing office chairs? You know, ModernMarvelFan, most people understand why an apples-to-oranges comparison isn’t at all meaningful or useful. You seem to have grown up somehow avoiding learning that bit of conventional wisdom.

        “LEO on the Cheap”:

        1. Bill Howland says:

          Why was my post deleted?

          1. Jay Cole says:

            Hey Bill,

            I don’t see any post moderation notes/alterations at all in this thread…perhaps it just didn’t upload to the server?

            I’ve been the only person on moderation duty since Friday at about 10 pm (ET) and I don’t think I’ve even fixed a spelling error.

            We did have two resets this weekend, it is possible you posted in one of those two reboot/roll-backs (can wipeout 10-15 mins of activity on the site when we do it).

            Resend if you like…it’ll be fine, we aren’t moderating you, lol

            I’m sure it was just a qwerk

            1. Bill Howland says:

              Thanks Jay, I’ll work the info into a post at another blog. I don’t like to comment more than a few times per article because I like to hear some of the quieter voices who perhaps are timid to post if they hear the regulars at too great a frequency.

              1. Jay Cole says:

                All good my friend, as long as you know we aren’t out there randomly messing with you by deleting your posts, hehe

        2. ModernMarvelFan says:

          PuPu said,

          “Seriously, you’re comparing manufacturing computer chips to manufacturing office chairs? You know, ModernMarvelFan, most people understand why an apples-to-oranges comparison isn’t at all meaningful or useful. ”

          But you managed to compare an ICE engine to a electric motor drive system or a Voltec transission to an automatic transmission when you don’t have a clue on any technical merit…

  18. ModernMarvelFan says:

    The e-Golf is a very nice car and decent to look at.

    It just needs a little bit performance upgrade..

  19. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

    ModernMarvelFan said:

    “Speaking like a true ‘average joe’ who is NOT an engineer.

    “The biggest misconception is that how expensive ICE powertrain. It is NOT. Despite more moving parts, those parts are mass produced very cheaply.”

    Critical thinking isn’t your forte, is it ModernMarvelFan?

    I don’t care how “cheap” you think it is to produce a motor with 200-400 moving parts. Producing a motor with just one moving part is far, far cheaper, other considerations aside.

    Even with gasmobiles having more than a century of constant volume production to bring down prices, and modern BEVs being mass produced for only five years, BEVs are already less expensive to produce, with one single exception: The battery pack. We’re only a decade or so from the tipping point at which the average BEV will be less expensive than a comparable gasmobile. And that will be largely due to a much simpler, much less expensive powertrain.

    1. Bill Howland says:

      Well I have to congratulate Lensman (PuPu).

      This post made the most sense of any you’ve posted to date. While I can do without the insults to MMF, (he usually is very accurate in what he says, and MMF I’m not disagreeing with you now) – taking PuPu’s point about it would be nice if EV’s were cheap to build:

      Take one of my favorite cars, my 1964 VW Beetle (or you can use the microbus as an example since it has much more room for batteries).

      Why not have a simple, manual steering car such as this was, and have a hubbed motor at each rear wheel? There would be no drive train except the colocated inverter at each wheel. And make the power of the motor 18-20 hp commensorate with the 60’s VW, so that the very expensive electronic drive – since it only has to run a 18 hp machine (one for each wheel) is then, because the power level is relatively low, quite refreshingly low cost.

      I know these conversions CAN be done cheaply, since an OLD-Timer at the PlugInAmerica event in ROchester, NY last year drove up with his Six HP (yes 6) 1971 VW Beetle conversion. I asked how much money he had into the project, and he said it cost him about $4000. OF course, only about 40 miles range, and no regenerative braking (its a 1, not 4 quadrant controller going to a series wound dc motor). But, it works!! And its cheap.

    2. Bill Howland says:

      I shouldn’t leave the mistaken impression that a 2 hub motor would be cheaper than a conventional drive train, at least at this state of the art:

      In the VW conversion I just mentioned, it would be the cheapest way to have just one 40 hp relatively high speed motor (also lighter), reduction gearing/differential, and one inverter, seeing as the drive motor in this case is quite small and a 32 kw inverter would be cheaper than 2 – 16 kw models.

    3. ModernMarvelFan says:

      “I don’t care how “cheap” you think it is to produce a motor with 200-400 moving parts. Producing a motor with just one moving part is far, far cheaper, other considerations aside.”

      Well, the problem here is that I never said EV motor is more expensive than ICE. I only said more parts aren’t necessarily more expensive.

      EV supperters who often lack the EE training will often point to the simpilcity of the Electric motor and compare that with the complexity of the ICE and use that as the ONLY reason how EVs should be cheaper. That is just incorrect. EV powertrain are expensive due to battery and motor controllers. The motor itself is about the cheapest part. In a typical ICE powertrain, the ICE is almost the cheapest part. Transmission is more expensive and all the engine accessories add up can be equal or more expensive than the engine itself.

      So, comparing EVs without its motor controller is really an apple to orange comparison.

      1. Bill Howland says:

        Yeah, and If I was going to criticize my own idea above about the 2 hubbed rear wheel motors, I’d say it would violate a ‘given’ of EV’s. For one, it would have very low starting torque if the hub motor was small and the controller was inexpensive and therefore had low current capacity.

        The horsepower would increase proportional to the speed. So that it might have 18 hp at 60 mph, but then only 1.8 hp at 6 mph. So it would be very slow off the line, exploding another myth that “we all know ev’s have ‘instant torque'”. This ev would have instant torque also, all 3 1/2 hp of it.

  20. electric says:

    Leaf will get more Range, VW gets cheaper.
    In next months BMW must react, all because of 150 miles Bolt. With double range other EVs must get
    a) cheaper
    b) more range
    Imagine next year full specs of Bolt, this will bring exiting times and some EVs will stand at dealer Like Lead.

  21. matt_ecocars says:

    Existing EV manufactures like VW with the e-golf will have a couple of years to take advantage of the circa $30,000 electric car market. As the Tesla model 3 is going to launch and make a huge impact on EV sales for other manufacturers. Currently there are more Tesla’s on the market than ever, . Sales are growing worldwide and waves of used vehicles are coming through, each sale creates another user experience and word of mouth will cause more market awareness.