Chevrolet Bolt & Bolt EUV

[sparky]

So were are the data/numbers to support this claim? Both the Tesla & Leaf run efficiencies greater than 85-90%
with a single motor configuration. Most likely with two motors and the additional controller electronics,
the drive-train efficiency will never exceed 95%. Given that and the potential increase in cost, the reduced
reliability (reliability is typically inversely related to complexity), how can a system analyst justify such a
system design?

I guess it's something along these lines:
From Tesla website:
Tesla 70 D All-wheel drive 240 miles range (EPA)
Tesla 70 Rear-wheel drive: 230 miles range (EPA est)

Where gasoline-powered all wheel drive cars sacrifice efficiency in return for all weather traction, Tesla’s Dual Motor propulsion system actually increases efficiency while delivering exceptional traction and control in slippery conditions. By precisely splitting the delivery of current from the battery to each motor, the Model S 85D actually gains an additional 10 miles of highway driving range compared to its rear motor Model S counterpart.

Plus AWD is a big seller in places that have winter.

 

[lorenfb]

So were are the data/numbers to support this claim? Both the Tesla & Leaf run efficiencies greater than 85-90%
with a single motor configuration. Most likely with two motors and the additional controller electronics,
the drive-train efficiency will never exceed 95%. Given that and the potential increase in cost, the reduced
reliability (reliability is typically inversely related to complexity), how can a system analyst justify such a
system design?

I guess it's something along these lines:
From Tesla website:
Tesla 70 D All-wheel drive 240 miles range (EPA)
Tesla 70 Rear-wheel drive: 230 miles range (EPA est)

Where gasoline-powered all wheel drive cars sacrifice efficiency in return for all weather traction, Tesla’s Dual Motor propulsion system actually increases efficiency while delivering exceptional traction and control in slippery conditions. By precisely splitting the delivery of current from the battery to each motor, the Model S 85D actually gains an additional 10 miles of highway driving range compared to its rear motor Model S counterpart.

"Plus AWD is a big seller in places that have winter"

As others have indicated, it's similar to the Voltec system and not
an all-wheel-drive, I.e. just a multiple motor front wheel drive.

 

[GRA]

So were are the data/numbers to support this claim? Both the Tesla & Leaf run efficiencies greater than 85-90%
with a single motor configuration. Most likely with two motors and the additional controller electronics,
the drive-train efficiency will never exceed 95%. Given that and the potential increase in cost, the reduced
reliability (reliability is typically inversely related to complexity), how can a system analyst justify such a
system design?

I guess it's something along these lines:
From Tesla website:
Tesla 70 D All-wheel drive 240 miles range (EPA)
Tesla 70 Rear-wheel drive: 230 miles range (EPA est)

Where gasoline-powered all wheel drive cars sacrifice efficiency in return for all weather traction, Tesla’s Dual Motor propulsion system actually increases efficiency while delivering exceptional traction and control in slippery conditions. By precisely splitting the delivery of current from the battery to each motor, the Model S 85D actually gains an additional 10 miles of highway driving range compared to its rear motor Model S counterpart.

Plus AWD is a big seller in places that have winter.

Note that it is actually 250 miles for the S70D, but Tesla decided to downgrade to 240 miles as the official rating, perhaps (as has been suggested) so as to not emphasize the Model X's relatively poor range in comparison. 250/230 = 1.087. How much that's worth to anyone in particular is up to them - I wonder what the sales breakdown has been between S70s and S70Ds once both were available, as they are the 'entry level' Tesla now.

 

[keydiver]

Note that it is actually 250 miles for the S70D, but Tesla decided to downgrade to 240 miles as the official rating, perhaps (as has been suggested) so as to not emphasize the Model X's relatively poor range in comparison.

I noticed that you said this before, that the 70D was actually rated at 250 RM, but I'm wondering where you heard that? It would be nice to think my 70D has 10 more miles of range than I counted on. I charged to 100% this morning for the first time, and the dash reads 240, which agrees with Tesla's website. Also, my 90% charge gives me 216 Rated Miles, which seems to be a little higher than most, but is exactly 90% of 240.

 

[lorenfb]

Before resolving the questionable efficiency issue of the proposed
Bolt, other more basic issues need to be resolved:

1. Whether it will actually be AWD and whether the resulting consumer
price will be competitive with other proposed sub $35K vehicles,
e.g. Model 3, resulting in a viable product. Furthermore, to use Tesla
at 4600 lbs with AWD as basis to extrapolate an efficiency of a proposed
product is of little value.

2. Whether it will actually be a multiple motor front wheel drive vehicle
and actually achieve efficiencies greater than single motor BEVs,
e.g, Tesla or Nissan.

Other than anecdotal data, is there a final released production spec
of the proposed Bolt to resolve these issues? Without that, let's hear
the next guess about the Bolt!

 

[LKK]

Before resolving the questionable efficiency issue of the proposed
Bolt, other more basic issues need to be resolved:

1. Whether it will actually be AWD and whether the resulting consumer
price will be competitive with other proposed sub $35K vehicles,
e.g. Model 3, resulting in a viable product. Furthermore, to use Tesla
at 4600 lbs with AWD as basis to extrapolate an efficiency of a proposed
product is of little value.

2. Whether it will actually be a multiple motor front wheel drive vehicle
and actually achieve efficiencies greater than single motor BEVs,
e.g, Tesla or Nissan.

Other than anecdotal data, is there a final released production spec
of the proposed Bolt to resolve these issues? Without that, let's hear
the next guess about the Bolt!

I've not seen anything from GM implying the Bolt will be AWD.

Most people expect the Bolt to use a variation of the single motor fixed gear Spark EV propulsion system. I think there are good reasons for the Bolt to use the Voltec II propulsion from the new Volt instead. Those reasons are commonality and better efficiency derived from two small motors vs one large motor. That's a guess, and a guess only. There has been no details of the Bolt propulsion system from GM other than to say it will be able to go around 200 miles and will be priced in the 30's after incentives.

 

[GRA]

Note that it is actually 250 miles for the S70D, but Tesla decided to downgrade to 240 miles as the official rating, perhaps (as has been suggested) so as to not emphasize the Model X's relatively poor range in comparison.

I noticed that you said this before, that the 70D was actually rated at 250 RM, but I'm wondering where you heard that? It would be nice to think my 70D has 10 more miles of range than I counted on. I charged to 100% this morning for the first time, and the dash reads 240, which agrees with Tesla's website. Also, my 90% charge gives me 216 Rated Miles, which seems to be a little higher than most, but is exactly 90% of 240.

Tesla (and the EPA) said so when the S70D was rated, although I forget just where i read 250 (can't find it with an initial search). Here's an example: http://insideevs.com/tesla-launches-model-s-70d-eliminates-base-60-kwh-model-s/

In the range chart it states that "combined range voluntarily lowered to 240 miles": EPA is 242.8 City, 246.4 Hwy, and range at 65mph @ 70 deg. per Tesla is 265. So I guess 250 EPA isa bit excessive, but 245 EPA would seem to have been doable, and 242-244 pretty much guaranteed.

 

[edatoakrun]

Maybe it should be called the LG Bolt?

GM And LG Teamed Up Intimately To Produce Chevrolet Bolt, Lots Of LG Inside

...GM gave some backstory on the Chevrolet Bolt, which it frames as a “joint planning and research” project, stating that engineers from the two companies had considered different vehicle architectures, as well as different ranges and performance options, until ultimately landing on the decision that the Bolt needed to be “affordable and deliver 200-plus miles of all-electric driving with spirited performance. “

In addition to listening to LG’s expertise on what vehicle to best offer, GM noted a long list of components and systems provided by the battery maker:
•Electric Drive Motor (built from GM design)
•Power Invertor Module (converts DC power to AC for the drive unit)
•On Board Charger
•Electric Climate Control System Compressor
•Battery Cells and Pack
•High Power Distribution Module (manages the flow of high voltage to various components)
•Battery Heater
•Accessory Power Module (maintains low-voltage power delivery to accessories)
•Power Line Communication Module (manages communication between vehicle and a DC charging station)
•Instrument Cluster
•Infotainment System

What is most interesting from this list, is that many of these e-drive systems were processes that GM had taken in-house for the Chevrolet Volt and Spark EV (such as the battery pack assembly in Brownstown, Michigan) – not so anymore apparently, which may speak to LG’s ability to control costs or a trade-off in the partnership...

LG has long expressed a desire to do more than just being a battery cell supplier to OEMs for their electric vehicles, today we are seeing the first fruits of that new passion come to light.

http://insideevs.com/gm-and-lg-teamed-up-intimately-to-produce-chevrolet-bolt-lots-of-lg-inside/

 

[evnow]

Looks like LG can help any other OEM create an EV quickly.

May be start making EVs themselves ...

 

[GetOffYourGas]

Frankly, the biggest surprise to me is the use of the term "spirited performance". I'm not going to lie - I'm excited to hear that GM is taking performance seriously on the Bolt. I want my next car to be much more fun to drive.

 

[LKK]

Will LG build to GM design or will LG do everything from scratch? I suspect this move was done to lower manufacturing costs to get the Bolt MSRP down closer to the $30K point.

 

[JeremyW]

Frankly, the biggest surprise to me is the use of the term "spirited performance". I'm not going to lie - I'm excited to hear that GM is taking performance seriously on the Bolt. I want my next car to be much more fun to drive.

I hope they use the spark EV motor, on the rear wheels please!

 

[Valdemar]

Does this mean there may be hope for a CHADEMO port on the Bolt?

 

[lorenfb]

I want my next car to be much more fun to drive.

And what does that imply? Do you not consider the Leaf a more "fun to drive" vehicle compared to most
all compacts whether it's a BEV, ICE or hybrid? When compared to my Mini turbo or my Porsche 911,
the Leaf can 'hang' in there, i.e. off-the-line acceleration (faster than most ICE/hybrids) or handling on
a slalom coarse (less body sway with lower CoG). At speeds less than 70-80 MPH, I find my Leaf a more
desirable vehicle to drive than the other two, notwithstanding the range anxiety on occasion.

 

[GetOffYourGas]

I want my next car to be much more fun to drive.

And what does that imply? Do you not consider the Leaf a more "fun to drive" vehicle compared to most
all compacts whether it's a BEV, ICE or hybrid? When compared to my Mini turbo or my Porsche 911,
the Leaf can 'hang' in there, i.e. off-the-line acceleration (faster than most ICE/hybrids) or handling on
a slalom coarse (less body sway with lower CoG). At speeds less than 70-80 MPH, I find my Leaf a more
desirable vehicle to drive than the other two, notwithstanding the range anxiety on occasion.

The most fun car I've ever owned was a Honda S2000. Obviously, it's not fair to compare the Leaf (a family car) to an S2000 (performance/sports car). But the Leaf is very soft in the corners, sits WAY too high, and has mediocre acceleration above 40MPH. I love the responsiveness of the EV power train. And the handling / ride height can be adjusted with aftermarket tweaks to the suspension. It would be nice to have 100+kW though, for more high-speed oomph. I don't drive autocross or slalom courses. I just enjoy a spirited drive through twisty mountain roads. And on those roads, the current stock Leaf falls short.

Basically my ideal next car would be a 200-mile BEV, 2-door, 4 seat sports coupe. The Bolt won't be that either. It is designed to be a utility vehicle which is fine. But maybe after a few years GM will offer a 2-door variant of the Bolt. If not, Tesla probably will for the Model III.

 

[lorenfb]

But the Leaf is very soft in the corners, sits WAY too high, and has mediocre acceleration above 40MPH. I love the responsiveness of the EV power train. And the handling / ride height can be adjusted with aftermarket tweaks to the suspension. It would be nice to have 100+kW though, for more high-speed oomph. I don't drive autocross or slalom courses. I just enjoy a spirited drive through twisty mountain roads. And on those roads, the current stock Leaf falls short.

Basically my ideal next car would be a 200-mile BEV, 2-door, 4 seat sports coupe.

Good suggestions.
Nissan could always offer a sport package upgrade including the features you mentioned.
I would pay extra for such an upgrade, as I like you enjoy "a spirited drive through twisty mountain roads".
It would be fun to 'press' a 4600 lb Tesla S on a tight twisty mountain road in a Leaf with a sport package.

 

[Valdemar]

I'm still hoping the ESFLOW will see production at some point.

 

[DNAinaGoodWay]

Does this mean there may be hope for a CHADEMO port on the Bolt?

No. CSS Combo.

 

[mwalsh]

Production Bolt will debut at the 2016 CES in January.

 

[TomT]

We work CES for two weeks every year so we'll look forward to seeing it there.

Production Bolt will debut at the 2016 CES in January.