Chevy Bolt EV and Bolt EUV production is ending this year
thedrive.com
thedrive.com
The Chevy Bolt and Chevy Volt were both superb cars, however, they sorta got eschewed for not being en vogue. The Volt in particular was very well engineered with a unique powertrain that offered multiple advantages over battery electric and hybrids, while not being astronomically priced.
What we're seeing is elitism, not environmentalism.
It also doesn't help that many U.S manufacturers opt into building Trucks and SUVs to avoid emission regulations: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jN7mSXMruEo
It honestly sounds like GM has more supplier problems than they do engineering or fundamental cost problems.
If they quality controlled their suppliers better, and demanded reimbursememt for failed components from suppliers (basically a warranty from their supplier) they would be much better of.
Also, some of this is a programming fault. GM is often good at this. Don't make the failure mode of something result in the car bricking itself.
The shifter issue stems from the fact the gear position sensor fails and tells people to "shift to park" before you can start the car.
Was that REALLY required? Can I honestly not start my car if I'm in D? I'm already forced to press the brake pedal anyway. So Jesus let me start it in whatever gear you think I'm in. Maybe there's a governmemt rule I suppose. I just wish things defaulted to not bricking themselves over a technicality. Car technically functions, mechanical selector is moving correcrly. Safety switch fails.
No, GM would be much better off if they made their own damn components and quit outsourcing everything in the universe.
The small companies have figured out that nobody can replace them because there is no competitor who can absorb their orders. Consequently, they can threaten to declare bankruptcy if they get hit with too high a penalty.
https://jalopnik.com/tesla-model-y-owners-have-found-home-de...
But seriously, yes they probably went a bit "just get it done" to shim and strap down that component.
That does not take away from them also doing some crazy engineering on major components that will surely improve the lifetime ownership also.
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2005/07/01/05-1306...
Thus if this sensor fails someday, it is a failure like any other than now technically breaks a law.. just like a failed windshield washer motor would no longer be compliant... But the vehicle can still technically start.
The owner can then decide if they want to fix the issue and have a fully federally compliant car, but it isn't bricked until they fix it.
How would you feel if your windshield wiper motor failed, no rain in sight, and you could no longer use your car?
That's how users feel who can't use their car because a park position sensor failed.
I'm hoping to pick up a Volt or other hybrid, because I don't have a garage I can charge an EV in, but not if they're prone to actual bricking.
I'd have to pay $10-15k more money to get a smaller car that wouldn't fit my young family loaded up for a 2 night trip at my sisters. We'd have to stop at the one charger available in a 2 hour radius off our route, and still would risk getting stranded due to range issues if driving during the winter. We make these trips monthly.
It's not elitism, it's that people have economic constraints, the electrics cars in the marketplace are at a cost differential that equates to a year of college, and have huge real world disadvantages compared to lower cost alternatives.
The real issue is charging infrastructure. I'm sure you wouldn't mind a 10 min break in an ioniq 5 or similar to go 20-80%, but these are few and far between right now.
So you're probably right that what's left is mostly people participating in a cultural trend. You're just wrong that people are refusing to solve the problem through electric cars, since electric cars don't solve the problem. People are acting reasonably in response to that, there's no inconsistency or hypocrisy in it.
- quieter - charge at home / no gas station - quicker and smoother acceleration and handling - less components (less breakdowns ... in theory) - cheaper maintenance - cheaper operation (electricity SHOULD be cheaper than gas) - one pedal driving - no air pollution - will be cheaper than ICE at initial cost very soon, and will eventually be much cheaper.
The downsides are long distance range + recharging times for those trips
The point is that EVs aren't primarily an environmental cause. For your typical american it will be a simple selfish rational choice. I would guess in about five years this will be the choice for the new car buyer:
- buy an electric car for $25000 - $30000 that will cost $2000 / yr between recharging and maintenance, and has resale value
- buy an ICE for $40000 that will cost $4000 / yr between gas and maintenance, but those two long trips you take a year will be a half hour faster. Oh, and its resale value is basically nothing since ICE is being phased out.
These are rational economic decisions, by the standards of what the "science" of Economics thinks is "rational" (generally speaking: think short term and only about yourself).
Now, the used EV market is a bit thin now, but that is changing rapidly. The only thing that changes the calculus is the battery replacement and the fact that used buyers aren't resale/tradein focused.
Consider how new cars are financed (and BOY are they financed these days, with 7-10 year loans!). And this goes to a lot of my thinking on how EVs and alt energy are going to inflict a shrinking economies of lessening scale on the oil and ICE industries: why would a bank finance an oil exploration/development project on the scale of 10-20 years right now?
Soon, why would a bank finance a 7-10 year loan on an ICE? A core part of that loan is the value of a car, but if the innovation rate and adoption rate of EVs is as rapid as it is (I think it will get faster once 5-10 big automakers really get cranking), the value of an ICE car bought new looks to depreciate EVEN FASTER than it normally does.
I would argue that the 7-year value of a newly purchased ICE today is half or less of what it conventionally is viewed as (and ICE cars are now much more reliable than even 10 years ago, which underpins a lot of the 7-10 year loans).
Have the banks caught on to this? probably not, they need to encounter some "rude awakenings".
Finally, consider how much industry focuses your choice. Do you think the car companies are going to EV strictly because it is "trendy" and that regulatory agencies are forcing it?
No. They are going because of economic realities.
Tesla is allegedly at 33% margin on its cars, and the cost projections for its most expensive components (the batteries) is down. Way down. Probably will drop by half in just a couple years with LFP / Sodium Ion advances, and whatever comes out of Solid State / Sulfur / whatever CATL is doing.
A car company today has a choice: keep making ICE cars that 5-10 years will cost $10000 MORE than an EV, or make the EV transition. (again, per above, an EV is a fundamentally superior vehicle for consumers in most ways).
The investors in auto companies know this. BMW, VW and other CEOs have been fired recently because they have squandered or failed to start the EV transition. The investors know that BEVs will cause apocalyptic disruption to automakers, and you are a dead man standing if you don't have a BEV engineering team spun up yesterday.
Slap a Toyota or maybe Honda badge on the grill and the Bolt/Volt would have flown off the shelves.
A real shame they discontinued the Fit in the North American market, I would have easily bought one but ended up with an HR-V because it's basically a Fit on steroids (same chassis, still has magic seats until 2022), but it's a big percent price jump: $17k (2020 fit) -> $21k (2020 hrv).
[1] https://www.honda.co.jp/Fit/webcatalog/type/list/
[2] https://www.honda.co.jp/Fit/webcatalog/type/crosstar/?from=c...
Given the current supply constraints, high volume low margin models don’t make a ton of business sense, unfortunately.
Model 3 around $37,000
Model S around $90,000
Lucid Air around $90,000
Everything else American to be made CUV size or bigger!
The Mustang is 1 inch longer and wider than the Model 3.
Nobody wants to sell small EVs in America, apparently.
https://www.carsized.com/en/cars/compare/ford-mustang-mach-e...
It’s obvious why a person might want a shorter or narrower car - so the car can be driven comfortably on smaller roads, fit in smaller parking spaces or garages. I can’t really imagine why a person would choose to buy a car because it’s 56 rather than 63 inches tall. That’s still well shorter than the shortest garage door opening I’ve ever heard of. Btw, the Bolt is also 63 inches tall (same as the Mustang).
They seem to forget that a kid buying a Civic today will one day have a family and drive a Honda SUV in a few years time.
VW/Nissan/Toyota will no doubt be glad.
The biggest threat to their bottom line is economy cars. If somebody buys an economy car who could possibly spend another $20,000 that is a lost opportunity that won’t come back for 5 of 10 years in many cases.
Last time i bought a Fit I wanted a new one but had to get a used because they had no Fits because the ‘factory washed out in a flood' but they had 50 HR-Vs lined up that nobody had bought yet that came from the same factory.
The automotive press repeats that line that Americans only want to buy huge cars like the people in The Manchurian Candidate but the fact is everyday somebody goes into a car dealership and gets pressured to buy something bigger than they wanted initially.
Is that really profitable? Or are they making it all on lower tier buyers at 6.9%? I worked in the car business for years and most manufacturers don't touch actual bad credit people, so all that 10%+ loans you hear about are at other banks dealerships go through.