Chevy Bolt will have 238 miles of range, EPA says !!

[SeanNelson]

It isn't uncommon to see Gen 1 Volts with 150,000 miles on them, and owners reporting no loss in electric-only range. I wonder if the same will hold true with the Volt 2.0 and Bolt 1.0 - especially given people won't give a thought to what's good for the battery and what isn't.

I expect these newer cars will also have remarkably good battery longevity. GM has shown it knows how to manage the state of charge as well as the temperatures to treat batteries with tender loving care, and in the case of the Bolt the battery will not get the same "abuse" that it does in a Volt because it won't be "completely" discharged and recharged anywhere near as often.

 

[oilerlord]

GM has shown it knows how to manage the state of charge as well as the temperatures to treat batteries with tender loving care, and in the case of the Bolt the battery will not get the same "abuse" that it does in a Volt because it won't be "completely" discharged and recharged anywhere near as often.

An EV's battery, by design, is never "completely" charged or discharged as an indicated SOC of 100% is really only using ~80% of total battery capacity (at least, that's the percentage with my car's 36kWh total / 28kWh usable battery). My point is that GM isn't being as conservative with the battery buffer as they once were with Volt 1.0 as they are now with Volt 2.0, the Spark EV 1.1, and perhaps - the Bolt. It's a safe bet that the majority of people lease, and/or don't keep their EV's past 100K miles, so it makes sense that GM may have opted for longer battery range at the expense of long term battery longevity. Time will tell.

 

[SeanNelson]

GM has shown it knows how to manage the state of charge as well as the temperatures to treat batteries with tender loving care, and in the case of the Bolt the battery will not get the same "abuse" that it does in a Volt because it won't be "completely" discharged and recharged anywhere near as often.

An EV's battery, by design, is never "completely" charged or discharged as an indicated SOC of 100% is really only using ~80% of total battery capacity (at least, that's the percentage with my car's 36kWh total / 28kWh usable battery). My point is that GM isn't being as conservative with the battery buffer as they once were with Volt 1.0 as they are now with Volt 2.0, the Spark EV 1.1, and perhaps - the Bolt.

And my point was that the typical Bolt driver isn't going to use up as much of the battery as possible on a daily basis, unlike many Volt drivers. And in fact the battery either won't be discharged as much on a daily basis or drivers will choose to recharge it less often, both of which make it easier on the battery and allow GM to trim the SOC buffers without undue risk.

Only time will tell for sure, but GM seems to have put a lot of effort into testing and evaluating battery performance and their products so far have given me a lot of confidence that they know what they're doing.

 

[NeilBlanchard]

No, the 24kWh Leaf has a EPA range of 84 miles, and the 30kWh version is 107.

That is the current rating.
The 2011/12 LEAF had an EPA rating of 73 miles on 100% of the pack.
In 2013, EPA test procedures were changed. Part of that change also dictated that the default 80% charge level be averaged with a 100% charge (the owner had to manually select a higher charge level if they were anticipating the need for more range). 80% range was 66, 100% was 84. This netted a 75 mile range rating.
For the 2014 (and beyond) Nissan dropped the 80% charge default and the EPA range reflects the entire (usable) battery capacity.

No, the 73 miles was on 80% of the charge.

With a larger pack, with many more cells, the Bolt EV will not stress it's battery as much as current EV's. And it will be cycled far less often - if you leave 20 miles as a buffer on any one charge, then you can go 3.3X longer between charges.

 

[litesong]

I'd like to see GM underpromise and overdeliver on range based on "normal" driving habits.

Normal americans over-accelerate, over-brake, speed, can't drive smoothly, tailgate, yo-yo their velocity, don't know how to approach, ascend or descend hills, have no idea at what speeds or rpms their transmissions shift, don't short shift & most seldom use efficiency as a guide to conduct their lives. American "normal" driving is waste personified. We ain't even talkin' hypermiling techniques.

 

[voltage]

With the 120 volt outlet in the average home, the car can be fully charged in 18 hours. A 240 volt outlet will halve that time.

A 40 Amp 240V outlet could charge this car in 9 hours.

A 15 Amp (12 Amp continuous) 120V outlet could NOT charge this car in 18 hours. More like 48 hours or more. 1440 Watts maximum will not charge 60kWh in under 41.67 hours at 100% efficiency.

And this is one reason why it's not a good idea to just cut and paste the text of article. You [Voltage] can mislead people into thinking that you actually wrote the article. Those words were written by Roberto Baldwin from Engadget.

The same error was called out in the comments section of his article.

https://www.engadget.com/2016/09/14/behind-the-wheel-of-gms-new-bolt/#comments

My mistake...i usually add the link. Didn't mean to mislead anyone