Chevrolet Bolt & Bolt EUV

[edatoakrun]

For example, I would expect an Ioniq driven from L.A to S.F (at the unofficial speed limit) could get there within ~ a half-hour of the time it took for a Bolt, and could even pass the bolt on a longer trip.

Both BEVs would be much slower than any ICEVs on any long trip, of course.

...There are exactly zero non-Tesla DC chargers over 125 amps in the USA, so your trip to San Francisco won't be faster than a Bolt EV. It will actually be far slower...

Tony is always very generous in his willingness to share his ignorance on matters of BEV range and efficiency.

As I posted in my entire comment on the previous page, the superior efficiency of the Ioniq over the Bolt means it will spend less time charging than the Bolt for each mile driven, and travel further on each kWh it accepts at the charge station, after both BEV's initial charges are depleted.

In fact, the lower the kW available from charge sites, the greater the advantage the Ioniq will gain in total travel time, on any given trip.

Assuming equal access to charge sites at suitable locations, the Ionic should advance on the Bolt's initial lead from its higher kWh starting charge as any long trip progresses, and at higher speeds (where the Bolt's poor aero design becomes more significant) and/or in cold conditions (where the Bolt's inferior resistance heater takes an additional toll on efficiency) the Ioniq will pass the Bolt even sooner.

The fact that the Ioniq has been reported to accept charge at ~70 kW, far higher than the Bolt, and with less taper over the charge percentage profile, will provide the Ioniq an additional advantage in total travel time on long trips, as soon as higher-kW charge stations become available.

 

[DNAinaGoodWay]

There may not be any non-Tesla QC over 50 kW today, but may be tomorrow, it's only a matter of time. I had my first Leaf a full year before there was even one QC available to use here. So it's a consideration before I sign another 3 year lease. If I go with an Ioniq, I'll be able to charge at ~70 kW at a 200 A unit, as opposed to the roughly 41 kW that a Bolt or similar would be limited to. So if I pull in at a low SOC when traveling, I might only need 10 minutes there instead of 20.

 

[TonyWilliams]

For example, I would expect an Ioniq driven from L.A to S.F (at the unofficial speed limit) could get there within ~ a half-hour of the time it took for a Bolt, and could even pass the bolt on a longer trip.

Both BEVs would be much slower than any ICEVs on any long trip, of course.

...There are exactly zero non-Tesla DC chargers over 125 amps in the USA, so your trip to San Francisco won't be faster than a Bolt EV. It will actually be far slower...

Tony is always very generous in his willingness to share his ignorance on matters of BEV range and efficiency.... The fact that the Ioniq has been reported to accept charge at ~70 kW, far higher than the Bolt, and with less taper over the charge percentage profile, will provide the Ioniq an additional advantage in total travel time on long trips, as soon as higher-kWh charge stations become available.

At least you are a known quantity of ignorance, eh? :lol:

You make assumptions to reach your conclusions. Let's repeat FACTS, and then you can attempt to argue the facts, and not your assumptions, mmmmmKay?

All Tesla cars and ONLY the Ioniq and Soul EV can charge at 200 amps or above. All these cars have 400 volt batteries (plus or minus 5 volts):

45kW = 365v * 125a max charge rate (Bolt EV, typical of most modern non-Tesla cars)
50kW = 400v * 125a max charge rate (Tesla with biggest battery, 90-100kWh)
70kW = 350v * 200a max charge rate (Soul EV and Ioniq in Norway and few other locations)
115kW = 325v * 365a max charge rate (Tesla 70-75kWh on Supercharger)
115kW = 350v * 330a max charge rate (Tesla 85-100kWh on Supercharger)

So, given that there are no non-Tesla chargers over 125 amps in the USA, and that the Tesla adaptor is limited to 125 amps, that means that ALL cars are limited to about 50kW. Period.

Now, let's look into the future. There is absolutely NO REASON that the Bolt EV can't accept 200 amps, with a battery that is twice as big as those two other non-Tesla cars that can also accept 200 amps that you are so enamored with.

Now, given this future scenario, with ubiquitous 200 amp or greater public chargers, I think even Ed can understand that the Bolt EV would be superior over a long distance journey (or maybe we just get more ad hominems).

 

[edatoakrun]

Tony,

You still don't seem to understand the simple fact that a BEV that gets superior efficiency in m/kWh from the charge site will spend less time charging for each mile driven.

I'll try one more time to explain the facts to you.

The Bolt is not terrible from an efficiency standpoint (far superior to a Toyota/Tesla **** sandwich BEV, for example) but it will spend much more time recharging on a long trip than a more efficient BEV like an Ioniq, whatever the rate of charge.

The Ioniq would have to stop once for twenty to thirty minutes (at the kW rates now available at DC sites in the USA) to cover the first ~200 miles of a long freeway trip, and fall behind a Bolt by that amount of time, initially.

But after that, the Ioniq will steadily catch up to the Bolt, and eventually pass it, as the trip continues, and less time is wasted at each of the subsequent charge sites.

..Now, let's look into the future. There is absolutely NO REASON that the Bolt EV can't accept 200 amps, with a battery that is twice as big as those two other non-Tesla cars that can also accept 200 amps that you are so enamored with...

There are many reasons that could explain why GM limited the Bolt's charge rate, and also imposed such an early and extreme taper in the charge.

It is possible that GM will allow the Bolt to charge at the same rate as the Ioniq in the future, as you speculate.

That would not significantly change the reality that I described above.

 

[wwhitney]

Per fueleconomy.gov, the 2017 Ioniq Electric has a highway rating of 122 mpge (27.6 kWh/100 miles), while the 2017 Bolt EV has a highway rating of 110 mpge (30.6 kWh/100 miles). So the Bolt EV uses 3 kWh more to go 100 miles.

Assume for the moment that with the existing DCFC infrastructure, the two vehicles will charge at the same rate. [Possibly not true because of more or less aggressive ramping, etc.] Also assume that the 60 kWh and 28 kWh capacities of the two vehicles are useable figures [I haven't been paying attention closely enough to know if that's true.]

For long trips the Bolt starts out 32 kWh ahead, but it loses 3 kWh off its advantage per 100 miles driven. That means for trips under 1067 miles, the Bolt will spend less time charging during the trip, while for trips over 1067 miles the Ioniq's greater efficiency makes up for its smaller starting capacity.

1067 miles is over 16 hours of driving at 65 mph, and that doesn't include the time spent charging. So as long as the driver is stopping every night and fully recharging the electric cars, as a practical matter the Ioniq's greater mpge will never make up for its smaller battery, in terms of time spent charging during a long trip.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[edatoakrun]

Per fueleconomy.gov, the 2017 Ioniq Electric has a highway rating of 122 mpge (27.6 kWh/100 miles), while the 2017 Bolt EV has a highway rating of 110 mpge (30.6 kWh/100 miles). So the Bolt EV uses 3 kWh more to go 100 miles...

Sorry, but your reasoning follows that false premise.

The EPA highway rating is based on a much lower speed (both average and highest) drive cycle than typical for long freeway trips in the USA, where you should expect the Bolt's high drag to bring the efficiency penalty far above ~10%.

As I said earlier, at typical California freeway left-lane speeds (close to 80 mph) and in cold conditions requiring cabin heating I would expect the Bolt efficiency penalty could exceed 20%.

In fact, there are so many other variables on a long trip in real-world conditions on long trips, that it is really silly to argue whether either BEV has a significant advantage in travel time.

If you're in a hurry to make a long trip, you should always drive an ICEV, the large time advantage for which will always dwarf the few minutes in difference in the total travel time between the Bolt and Ioniq.

The Bolt however does have an obvious disadvantage in high costs of operation, both in the purchase/lease price and higher fuel costs due to the lower efficiency whenever you drive it, even on the shortest trips.

 

[wwhitney]

Per fueleconomy.gov, the 2017 Ioniq Electric has a highway rating of 122 mpge (27.6 kWh/100 miles), while the 2017 Bolt EV has a highway rating of 110 mpge (30.6 kWh/100 miles). So the Bolt EV uses 3 kWh more to go 100 miles...

Sorry, but your reasoning follows that false premise.

OK, suppose that premise is false, and the penalty is actually double, i.e. the Bolt uses 6 kWh more to go 100 miles. That would drop the breakeven distance in terms of charging time to 533 miles. That's still over 8 hours of driving at 65 mph. With charging time, that's longer than most anyone would want to drive either car in one day.

So the conclusion still holds that the Ioniq EV's greater efficiency can't make up for its smaller battery, in terms of time spent charging on a long trip.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[TonyWilliams]

Tony,

You still don't seem to understand the simple fact that a BEV that gets superior efficiency in m/kWh from the charge site will spend less time charging for each mile driven.

I'll try one more time to explain the facts to you.

This might seep into that thick skull of yours just a bit better than big words. I'll let you tell us how any other car, including those big bad Tesla cars that you have a spur in your saddle about, can beat this. We can stipulate that ALL the cars you might favor are fully capable of 75-125 miles between charge stations (not really, but it's the internet).

If your answer is just better consumption rate with equal charge rate, then sure, the other cars win by a small margin. But, I'd have to see those other cars actually add 125 miles of range AT AN AVERAGE RATE OF 42KW.

That's what you have to beat:

 

[edatoakrun]

...That would drop the breakeven distance in terms of charging time to 533 miles. That's still over 8 hours of driving at 65 mph. With charging time, that's longer than most anyone would want to drive either car in one day.

So the conclusion still holds that the Ioniq EV's greater efficiency can't make up for its smaller battery, in terms of time spent charging on a long trip.

Cheers, Wayne

No, using your assumptions of the Ioniq's efficiency advantage (which, BTW are are almost certainly too high for a speed as low as ~65 mph, but probably close to correct for a trip at ~80 mph) the Ioniq would complete any trip over 533 miles in less time than the Bolt.

Tony,

You still don't seem to understand the simple fact that a BEV that gets superior efficiency in m/kWh from the charge site will spend less time charging for each mile driven.

I'll try one more time to explain the facts to you.

...If your answer is just better consumption rate with equal charge rate, then sure, the other cars win by a small margin. But, I'd have to see those other cars actually add 125 miles of range AT AN AVERAGE RATE OF 42KW.

That's what you have to beat:

Actually Tony, if you want to add the Ioniq to that chart, you would want to specify ~ 75 to ~100 miles between recharges, which reportedly would allow close to a ~42 kW charge rate over the entire trip.

You will then see the total travel time line for the Bolt cross (exceed) the Ioniq's on your chart, exactly where depending on your assumptions of actual efficiency at speed for both BEVs.

You two are welcome to continue arguing over which of these two BEVs can make any trip of eight to eighteen hours a few minutes faster than the other under any realistic assumptions, or even the distinctly unreal assumptions Tony prefers to consider, as graphically displayed above.

But you'd have to be an idiot, IMO, to consider that small a travel time advantage by either BEV a significant reason to choose to buy either of them, when any beater ICEV would shorten total travel time on the same route by hours.

 

[Stoaty]

Who would want to stop twice as often to charge (Ioniq)? That assumes there are plenty of charging stations, extra time to get off the freeway and find the station, etc. A longer stop with the Bolt would be more conducive to getting a meal. Do you want a long tether, or a short one? The answer is pretty obvious to me. How about 200 mile trips? No stopping to charge with the Bolt. I drive 140 miles round trip most weekends with a lot of elevation gain. The Bolt would handle that easily. I would have to charge the Ioniq. Note to self: longer range is better.

 

[GRA]

Just to interject, the Bolt owner's manual says that it needs at least an 80kW charger to get to replenish 90 miles in 30 minutes: http://insideevs.com/chevrolet-bolt...kw-dc-fast-charging-owners-manual-now-online/ Assuming a max. battery voltage around 400, that implies it can handle at least 200A.

 

[TonyWilliams]

You two are welcome to continue arguing over which of these two BEVs can make any trip of eight to eighteen hours a few minutes faster than the other under any realistic assumptions, or even the distinctly unreal assumptions Tony prefers to consider, as graphically displayed above.

But you'd have to be an idiot, IMO, to consider that small a travel time advantage by either BEV a significant reason to choose to buy either of them, when any beater ICEV would shorten total travel time on the same route by hours.

Heck, Ed, I might even unblock you after that logical statement. I don't personally care to compare 100-ish range cars for long distance trips. To be honest, it's a bit nutty to consider them for "normal" driving over a long distance.

I didn't expect you to make a logical comment about my "unreal" graph. That's because it's not unreal. I actually added an arbitrary 1 hour, plus 15 minutes of "not charging / not driving" time, while each person fumbles for the plug. Also, the average speed is 7% below the indicated speed, knowing that no 75-125 mile trip will average 65mph, just because that's how fast you're driving. There's a few other factors thrown in, too. With my now well over 100,000 miles of EV driving, and many long trips under my belt (I think you've gone all the way to Sacto? or SF Bay?).

I think that I've driven an EV more times than you to/from the Mt Shasta area to the Sacto / Bay area. In the last 5 years, I've done it at least 8-10 times. I can tell you that nothing beats a Tesla during my month long, coast to coast drive last year (San Diego, Washington state, Austin, TX, Atlanta, Massachusetts, Buffalo, NY, hit a deer, $38k in damages, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Chicago, Madison, WI, Rapid City, SD, Montana, Washington state again, San Diego). All EV.. and you ain't gunna do that in your 2011 LEAF, or a 2017 Bolt EV.

The Rav4 EV that I drive charges at that same average 42kW (although up to about 75 - 80% of a 45kWh battery). With a ideal range of about 120-140 miles at freeway speed with a new condition battery, I consider this the ABSOLUTE minimum for a regional touring car. Just like the Bolt EV, I drive 75-125 miles typically, and charge for 30 to 60 minutes typically. There's a huge advantage to the consumption of the Bolt EV over my Rav4 EV, but I wouldn't trade (Bolt EV around 4 miles per kWh at 65mph, Rav4 EV about 3.4 miles per kWh).

So, the shorter range Hyundai might have a bit better consumption at freeway speed? In exchange for a 100 mile car? No thanks. You couldn't give me another "100 mile" range car, although we will buy one for a company car next month (a LEAF, of course).

 

[DaveEV]

Ed / Tony - cut the name-calling and snide remarks out of your arguments.

You guys are better than that and may I take this time to refer you to the forum rules.

 

[lorenfb]

Who would want to stop twice as often to charge (Ioniq)? That assumes there are plenty of charging stations, extra time to get off the freeway and find the station, etc. A longer stop with the Bolt would be more conducive to getting a meal. Do you want a long tether, or a short one? The answer is pretty obvious to me. How about 200 mile trips? No stopping to charge with the Bolt. I drive 140 miles round trip most weekends with a lot of elevation gain. The Bolt would handle that easily. I would have to charge the Ioniq. Note to self: longer range is better.

And then there's the simple logical and rational approach that prevails for most!

 

[TonyWilliams]

Just to interject, the Bolt owner's manual says that it needs at least an 80kW charger to get to replenish 90 miles in 30 minutes: http://insideevs.com/chevrolet-bolt...kw-dc-fast-charging-owners-manual-now-online/ Assuming a max. battery voltage around 400, that implies it can handle at least 200A.

You do realize that even if the Bolt EV eventually is allowed to accept 200 amps by the engineers at GM, it won't charge at 400 volts at 200 amps, correct?

At 400 volts, it will be close to zero amps.

The Bolt EV is not going to charge at 80kW... ever. It might handle 200 amps, just like the Hyundai Ioniq and Kia Soul EV.

That means about 70kW peak charge rate at 200a * 350v.

 

[TonyWilliams]

Ed / Tony - cut the name-calling and snide remarks out of your arguments.

You guys are better than that and may I take this time to refer you to the forum rules.

One of the disadvantages to not being a moderator here. On sites that I moderate, as soon as Ed threw his unprovoked "first punch", I would have deleted his post and warned him. If he persisted, I would have suspended his access. If his activities persisted, I would ban him AND block his IP address. Then, as frequently happens, I would be ready for the inevitable new user name that is spewing the same hate.

When those moderator actions are NOT taken, it leaves the recipient of these forum violations to either be the attackers punching bag by ignoring it, or to respond.

I'm not a very good victim, and I don't have the ability to stop Ed. You do.

Reference this personal attack in violation of the terms of service:

Tony is always very generous in his willingness to share his ignorance on matters of BEV range and efficiency.

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=18907&start=1260&p=486192&view=show#p486192

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

First (?) significant discounts from MSRP on Bolt leases posted:

...All 2017 Bolt EV LT - Rydell Discount of $2,000 Off MSRP (PLUS all applicable incentives and government rebates)
All 2017 Bolt EV Premier - Rydell Discount of $2,500 Off MSRP (PLUS all applicable incentives and government rebates)...

http://gm-volt.com/forum/showthread.php?277881-Bolt-EV-Presidents-Day-Pricing-at-Rydell-Chevrolet

Barring a gas price spike, lower Bolt prices are likely in coming months, IMO.

still no joy for leasers. Guessing that will change in 6 months when T3 hits the streets....

 

[edatoakrun]

Who would want to stop twice as often to charge (Ioniq)?.. .

No reason you have to.

As has been pointed out previously, the Bolt's poor freeway efficiency and early charge taper (reportedly dropping to ~35 kW at ~54% charge, and only ~25 kW at ~70% charge) means the Bolt needs to recharge every 75 to 125 miles to travel long distances as quickly as possible.

Driving an Ioniq, you would want to stop every 75 to 100 miles to accomplish the same objective, probably one more recharge stop over a whole day's driving.

Watch Bjørn Nyland's video below.

Using only the lower-kW DC sites available in the USA today, the same ~20 kWh of charge should take close to 30 minutes.

~20 kWh charge accepted in ~19 minutes.

Slowly increases from ~60 kW to ~70 kW (perhaps due in part to pack warming?) until charge rate begins to taper after reaching > 75% capacity.

Charging Hyundai Ioniq on 100 kW CCS
Bjørn Nyland

Published on Jan 16, 2017
Hyundai Ioniq supports up to 70 kW via the CCS plug. I tested this on a 100 kW Delta charger at Vestby, Norway last night. Peak power was 69.3 which was pretty close.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wb3gJ8fWW5g

Hyundai Ioniq BEV, hybrid, and PHEV.

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=21136&start=90

"Stoaty"...A longer stop with the Bolt would be more conducive to getting a meal...

Well, if you prefer to wait longer for charging, on long trips, I suppose the bolt may be the BEV you want...

"Stoaty"... I drive 140 miles round trip most weekends with a lot of elevation gain. The Bolt would handle that easily. I would have to charge the Ioniq...

Maybe not.

Depends primarily on how fast you drive. Total ascent and descent have relatively little effect on BEV range, and will have considerably less effect on the lighter Ioniq, than it does on a LEAF.

I posted back in 2015 why a ~27 kWh available LEAF could make my regular ~161 mile ~13,600 ft. total ascent/descent trip on one charge, and the Ioniq's superior efficiency and available battery capacity when compared to the LEAF should make it considerably easier.

I'd expect an Ioniq would probably make the same trip using only about 22 kWh, meaning I'd have ~6 kWh remaining in my initial charge, so I could drive faster (or further) without a recharge, if I wanted to.

="edatoakrun"

Some more info for anyone wanting to plan a drive up to Lassen next year.

I estimate my LEAF used ~22.7 actual kWh to reach the ~8,500 ft. Lassen Peak lot, and ~25.2 actual kWh to make the entire ~161 mile ~13,600 ft. total ascent/descent trip, when I last drove this route on 8/19/15.

Which is why I would have needed to recharge en-route back in 2011, when My LEAF had ~21 actual kWh available, and need to even more so now, (~4.5 years and ~41,000 miles later) since my pack now only has ~18 kWh available to turtle.

I expect the 30 kWh pack probably has ~27 kWh available, so I'd probably be able to make ~the same trip at ~the same speeds on a single charge, in a 2016 SV or SL...

Lassen Peak trip

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=5022&start=10

"Stoaty"...Note to self: longer range is better

That seems to be the simplistic thinking GM is counting on to sell overpriced, overweight, and inefficient Bolts...

 

[GRA]

Just to interject, the Bolt owner's manual says that it needs at least an 80kW charger to get to replenish 90 miles in 30 minutes: http://insideevs.com/chevrolet-bolt...kw-dc-fast-charging-owners-manual-now-online/ Assuming a max. battery voltage around 400, that implies it can handle at least 200A.

You do realize that even if the Bolt EV eventually is allowed to accept 200 amps by the engineers at GM, it won't charge at 400 volts at 200 amps, correct? <snip>

Sure. While the exact charge algorithm is unknown, I assume it will be something approaching constant current, then switching to constant voltage.

 

[GetOffYourGas]

First (?) significant discounts from MSRP on Bolt leases posted:

...All 2017 Bolt EV LT - Rydell Discount of $2,000 Off MSRP (PLUS all applicable incentives and government rebates)
All 2017 Bolt EV Premier - Rydell Discount of $2,500 Off MSRP (PLUS all applicable incentives and government rebates)...

http://gm-volt.com/forum/showthread.php?277881-Bolt-EV-Presidents-Day-Pricing-at-Rydell-Chevrolet

Barring a gas price spike, lower Bolt prices are likely in coming months, IMO.

still no joy for leasers. Guessing that will change in 6 months when T3 hits the streets....

Yup. Right now Chevy has the market to itself, so they can charge full MSRP. iMO that's just good business to charge as much as people will pay.

But the Model 3 won't be a competitor to the Bolt until someone without a reservation can buy one. I suspect that will happen in mid 2019, more than two years from now.