Does Chevy Bolt have more range than Tesla

[splitmitten]

Entire article: http://insideevs.com/motley-fool-wonders-if-chevy-bolt-has-more-range-than-tesla-model-3/


It’s a question that only Tesla can answer right now, but with the Bolt officially EPA rated at 238 miles of range, one has to wonder whether or not Tesla will deliver over its promised 215 miles of range on the Model 3, especially considering that metric would well surpass the base Model S 60 kWh version’s 218 mile range.

Then there’s the fact that several media outlets have already driven the Bolt well over its rated range, with some even reporting that 290 miles is possible on a single charge.

Motley Fool states:

“With Tesla only promising 215 miles or more of driving range on a single charge for its Model 3, this has led to much media coverage of the Bolt concluding the vehicle has trumped Tesla on the key metric. But Tesla hasn’t actually stated the Model 3’s official range, so the winner can’t be identified yet.”

With the Bolt though, Chevrolet under promised (200-plus miles of range was the initial target) and over delivered. It remains to be seen if Tesla will now do the same so that its Model 3 (even in base form) outdoes the Bolt.

As for that 215-mile promise for the Model 3, Musk previously stated:

“I want to emphasize these are minimum numbers.”

Motley Fool adds:

“..the Model 3 will certainly have more than 215 miles of range, Tesla recently confirmed with The Motley Fool. Even more, Tesla emphasized to The Motley Fool that its promised range for the Model 3 is only for the base version of the vehicle. This means there will almost undoubtedly be battery options available with higher range.”

 

[SparkE]

“..the Model 3 will certainly have more than 215 miles of range, Tesla recently confirmed with The Motley Fool. Even more, Tesla emphasized to The Motley Fool that its promised range for the Model 3 is only for the base version of the vehicle. This means there will almost undoubtedly be battery options available with higher range.”

It makes sense - that's what they do with the model S currently: there are 60, 75, and 90 kWh battery pack choices.

 

[GetOffYourGas]

It will be interesting to see what Tesla does with the Model III's range. However, the difference is mostly academic. Even if Tesla does come in with 215 miles, the car is more versatile than the 238 mile Bolt, due to the Supercharging network. The 23 mile difference is mostly on paper. Superchargers are more than twice as fast as the Bolt's presumed 50kW charging, and they are far more available. How many times is one really driving more than 215 miles, but less than 238?

It's like "range" is the new "horsepower". Reminds me of the old days of pony cars, with Ford, Chevy, and Dodge trying to one-up each other in horses. In the end, all three sold plenty of their cars, and people were happy with them, even if they had the "least" horses under the hood of the three.

 

[oilerlord]

Tesla is being conservative. Better to underpromise and overdeliver.

 

[DucRider]

It will be interesting to see what Tesla does with the Model III's range. However, the difference is mostly academic. Even if Tesla does come in with 215 miles, the car is more versatile than the 238 mile Bolt, due to the Supercharging network. The 23 mile difference is mostly on paper. Superchargers are more than twice as fast as the Bolt's presumed 50kW charging, and they are far more available. How many times is one really driving more than 215 miles, but less than 238?

It's like "range" is the new "horsepower". Reminds me of the old days of pony cars, with Ford, Chevy, and Dodge trying to one-up each other in horses. In the end, all three sold plenty of their cars, and people were happy with them, even if they had the "least" horses under the hood of the three.

"More versatile" in one specific set of circumstances - long trips on the interstates.
Many people, including Model reservation holders, would much prefer a hatchback for it's versatility! That's the biggest complaint about the Model 3 and the reason people clamor for the want the Model Y.

While the Supercharging network is a great benefit, remember that it will cost extra on the Model 3. It's also very possible to equal the 238 mile range of the Bolt you'll need to order a larger battery pack on the Tesla. In the nearly 3 years we've leased the Fit EV, there is exactly one trip I've taken that would be impractical in the Bolt - Portland to Oakland (and back). And remember that the CCS fast charging network is not a static infrastructure and is expanding rapidly. And the Supercharger network is overtaxed with waiting lines and valet charging in some areas already, and the ramp up in S and X are outpacing the expansion of the network. When they have 10x the vehicles trying to use 2x the stations (Tesla plans at Model 3 launch), there will be usability issues.

Is the Supercharger network the best available solution for interstate travel on freeways? Absolutely. Are willing to pay thousands of dollars more for a vehicle with access to that network because you might want to take a long trip someday? Or do you regularly travel 400+ miles in a day along routes that have superchargers and it is critical that your EV is capable of doing it?

For many people, the Bolt will be more versatile because it is a hatchback.

For those interested in a fast charging study and how the future is being planned:
http://driveoregon.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Drive-Oregon-DCFC-Paper-EVS29-June-2016.pdf

 

[roundpeg]

I agree on the form factor question and the fundamentally superior practicality of hatchbacks, a feature that led to my interest in the Bolt and my indifference to the Model 3. I will very likely never own another car with a conventional trunk.

 

[Gatedad]

Duc: You make some interesting and valid points, although to some degree I disagree with you. The Tesla M3 will start out at a lower cost, but will easily come in at a good deal more than a top of the line Bolt(if M3 is fully equipped). Nothing wrong with that at all, in fact it is great to be able to offer those additional features. Plenty of buyers will want them and have no problem paying top dollar for them. The Bolt EV, on the other hand, I believe, is marketed for the set of buyers who cannot afford or don't want to spend the kind of money they'd have to spend on a M3. Because of that, I think M3 buyers will gladly spend the extra money to join in the SC network. Some will agree to a pay for use fee, others will do the annual or lifetime membership option. Makes sense as a lot of people would rarely have need for SC'ing, but like the flexibility it provides. I do feel, as you have pointed out, that the overwhelming majority of trips for most people in a Bolt EV will be handled comfortably by the 238 mile range. The only issue I see with assuming a robust CCS network will be developed is that this seems to be a haphazard approach. We have little CCS here in the Northeast (yes, it is growing, but not very impressive at this point). If someone wants to take a trip in their Tesla from say, Philly to Washington, DC they could easily catch a full charge at the SC site in Delaware and even the lowest range Tesla could handle that trip without incident. A CCS dependent car, though, has to worry about the CCS station being in working order and that there are enough open slots. Most of the CCS here are one bay stations. Plus, it really makes a difference in comfort if there are bathrooms/food facilities nearby. That may very well become the standard, but from what I have seen it is not yet there today. Tesla SC sites appear to be of a magnitude better in regards to all those points. Hopefully CCS will get their act in gear, but with no standard approach and no uniform payment system, it could be tough going. I like both cars, really, really hope that Tesla is successful and just as earnestly want to see the Bolt EV do well. They are both trendsetters, but for slightly different buyers.

 

[GetOffYourGas]

All valid points. It depends on how you are looking at versatility. I would still say that - at least subjectively for me - the Model III is overall a more versatile vehicle (i.e. transportation) than the Bolt.

Are willing to pay thousands of dollars more for a vehicle with access to that network because you might want to take a long trip someday? Or do you regularly travel 400+ miles in a day along routes that have superchargers and it is critical that your EV is capable of doing it?

Neither of these extreme cases apply to me. I regularly (average more than once per month) take trips of around 250-300 highway miles. Neither car can make it without stopping to charge, especially in the colder months. The superchargers available in upstate NY (CA's situation doesn't affect me) trump anything that will be rolled out for CCS for at least the rest of this decade.

The rest of my driving can easily be handled by my short-range Leaf. So to flip your question around, why would I pay thousands of dollars more for a Bolt over say a 30kWh Leaf, if it cannot make my longer trips?

For me, the Bolt's range is a great leap in the right direction. Unfortunately, without CCS infrastructure, it still falls short.

It will be much easier to put in a few CCS chargers than to get an affordable EV that can travel 300 miles on the highway during an upstate NY winter (temperatures regularly dipping below 0F, especially in the North Country). But at the same time, I don't see CCS chargers being installed there in this decade. The superchargers I'd need are already in place.

And funny you should mention crowding. Supercharger stations have multiple stalls each, and can pump out more than 2X the power that the Bolt can take. So they can handle an order of magnitude greater traffic than your typical CCS location. If I have to wait in line, the wait at the superchargers will likely be much shorter than at the CCS charger.

 

[JeffN]

Unfortunately, without CCS infrastructure, it still falls short....

l don't see CCS chargers being installed there [Upper New York] in this decade. The superchargers I'd need are already in place....

And funny you should mention crowding. Supercharger stations have multiple stalls each, and can pump out more than 2X the power that the Bolt can take. So they can handle an order of magnitude greater traffic than your typical CCS location. If I have to wait in line, the wait at the superchargers will likely be much shorter than at the CCS charger.

Perhaps. We do know that VW will begin spending about $100 million a year on Zero Emission Vehicle charging technology for all states except California (covered by alseparate funding) for a total of 10 years.

For multiple reasons it seems like a good bet that most of that will, at least initially, go towards installing a national highway corridor fast DC charging system using 100+ kW (200A or more) chargers with CCS and likely CHAdeMO plugs.

That's roughly in line with the amount that Tesla has been spending to install Supercharger locations in the US.

We should see VW initial spending plan by March or April of next year.

 

[GetOffYourGas]

Unfortunately, without CCS infrastructure, it still falls short....

l don't see CCS chargers being installed there [Upper New York] in this decade. The superchargers I'd need are already in place....

And funny you should mention crowding. Supercharger stations have multiple stalls each, and can pump out more than 2X the power that the Bolt can take. So they can handle an order of magnitude greater traffic than your typical CCS location. If I have to wait in line, the wait at the superchargers will likely be much shorter than at the CCS charger.

Perhaps. We do know that VW will begin spending about $100 million a year on Zero Emission Vehicle charging technology for all states except California (covered by alseparate funding) for a total of 10 years.

For multiple reasons it seems like a good bet that most of that will, at least initially, go towards installing a national highway corridor fast DC charging system using 100+ kW (200A or more) chargers with CCS and likely CHAdeMO plugs.

That's roughly in line with the amount that Tesla has been spending to install Supercharger locations in the US.

We should see VW initial spending plan by March or April of next year.

This would be fantastic if it came to pass. I have my reservations about how much will go to actual hardware in the ground, versus studies, or other uses entirely like Hydrogen stations. I will be watching the developments closely for sure.

 

[DucRider]

I agree completely that the best fast charge network is Teslas Superchargers.

I took exception the the sweeping statement that the Model 3 was "more versatile". I see way too many generalizations about EV's that project an individuals needs onto the needs of others.

There is no "one size fits all" solution. If I lived 250 miles from the nearest Tesla service center, that would be a factor. If I needed to travel cross country in my EV, that would certainly limit my choices. Same with the need to carry 6 or 7 passengers or a $10K budget. If it will be your only vehicle or you can't charge at home, the advantages/disadvantages will be very different.

For my situation, the Bolt makes more sense.
* There is a fantastic free charging option for all my 300+ mile trips. It adds absolutely no time. PDX has free L1 charging in the economy lot.
* I can get one before the lease on my current EV expires
* 3x the range of my current EV makes it possible to do trips I'd never do in the Fit EV, Portland to Seattle, the Oregon Coast, camp at Mt Rainier, etc
* I prefer the hatchback form factor
* Oregon has one the best public charging networks around if I do need it

Your criteria will be different, and may very well lead you to a different choice.

 

[JeffN]

This would be fantastic if it came to pass. I have my reservations about how much will go to actual hardware in the ground, versus studies, or other uses entirely like Hydrogen stations. I will be watching the developments closely for sure.

From the DOJ court filing summarizing and responding to public comments on the proposed VW settlement:

...investment in research and development is not anticipated to be allowed as a creditable cost because it is unlikely to be incurred for the sole purpose of implementing approved ZEV investment projects or activities...

Certainly, H2 station installations would be permitted under the spending guidelines but VW has not been an aggressive leader on fuel cells. Toyota, Hyundai, and Honda have announced or are already selling fuel cell cars in small numbers. VW has indicated they are likely to sell a fuel cell car but haven't said exactly what it would look like or when it would be available.

Meanwhile, they issued a new public strategy paper laying out plans to sell 20-25% of their car sales as plugins by 2025 meaning 2-3 million plugin cars per year with at least several of 30 models being big battery long-range capable BEVs.

It seems clear to me that VW's business interests clearly lie in quickly standing up a nation-wide fast charging DC network that could plausibly be marketed as competitive with Tesla's Supercharger network. VW/Audi has long-range BEVs first coming out in a couple of years and they already sell a ~100 mile e-Golf with CCS charging today. If they want a network to be competitive or well underway in 2018 they need to be devoting all of their ZEV funding towards this right away.

 

[DucRider]

Certainly, H2 station installations would be permitted under the spending guidelines but VW has not been an aggressive leader on fuel cells. Toyota, Hyundai, and Honda have announced or are already selling fuel cell cars in small numbers. VW has indicated they are likely to sell a fuel cell car but haven't said exactly what it would look like or when it would be available.

Meanwhile, they issued a new public strategy paper laying out plans to sell 20-25% of their car sales as plugins by 2025 meaning 2-3 million plugin cars per year with at least several of 30 models being big battery long-range capable BEVs.

It seems clear to me that VW's business interests clearly lie in quickly standing up a nation-wide fast charging DC network that could plausibly be marketed as competitive with Tesla's Supercharger network. VW/Audi has long-range BEVs first coming out in a couple of years and they already sell a ~100 mile e-Golf with CCS charging today. If they want a network to be competitive or well underway in 2018 they need to be devoting all of their ZEV funding towards this right away.

All the above is true. but 40% of the money is earmarked for California and oversight is by CARB - and they are the primary factor driving fuel cell adoption. I cannot believe they would miss the opportunity to expand the number of hydrogen fueling stations - especially when it's on somebody else's dime.

 

[JeffN]

All the above is true. but 40% of the money is earmarked for California and oversight is by CARB - and they are the primary factor driving fuel cell adoption. I cannot believe they would miss the opportunity to expand the number of hydrogen fueling stations - especially when it's on somebody else's dime.

True, but it's not at all clear yet how much legal or non-legal influence CARB will have over VW's California settlement ZEV initiative spending.

California has already funded 50 H2 stations for about $75 million and has plans to fund an additional 50 H2 stations for a similar amount. However, this H2 station money was already expected to come from existing state funding lines that amount to $100 million per year from DMV fees.

It's not clear that CARB would feel it necessary to pressure VW into spending on H2, at least during the first few years. More likely, I think, is that VW spending may cause CARB and the California Energy Commissiin may spend less of that annual $100 million in state money on DC charging. But that's just my guess.

 

[westernkicks]

It will be interesting to see what Tesla does with the Model III's range. However, the difference is mostly academic. Even if Tesla does come in with 215 miles, the car is more versatile than the 238 mile Bolt, due to the Supercharging network. The 23 mile difference is mostly on paper. Superchargers are more than twice as fast as the Bolt's presumed 50kW charging, and they are far more available. How many times is one really driving more than 215 miles, but less than 238?

It's like "range" is the new "horsepower". Reminds me of the old days of pony cars, with Ford, Chevy, and Dodge trying to one-up each other in horses. In the end, all three sold plenty of their cars, and people were happy with them, even if they had the "least" horses under the hood of the three.

. " How many times is one really driving more than 215 miles, but less than 238?" Good articulation on this perspective, point nicely made