GM’s the first out with its Q2 financials and overall the picture is good, even though it’s going to have to eat more than $500 million in costs associated with Cruise. It’s ok! The death of the Cruise Origin robotaxi is good news for GM’s potential best product: The Chevy Bolt.
While we’re talking about GM we should probably talk about the company’s financials, which were strong enough in the first two quarters to allow the company to raise its guidance. The reason? Trucks.
So what’s GM going to do for the future? How is it going to keep this going? Let’s take a deeper look into some of its upcoming product, specifically the ICE vehicles that are going away and the ones that are sticking around a little longer.
And, finally, Stellantis recall!
Cruise Origin Survives Tornado, Killed By ‘Regulatory Uncertainty’
There was a lot of internal debate over a story about a tornado almost wiping out a bunch of Cruise Origin driverless taxis in March. GM’s driverless car company, Cruise, co-developed a room-like robotaxi with Honda and started producing them at GM’s Factory Zero in Michigan with the hopes to start testing them sooner rather than later.
And then the terrible pedestrian dragging accident happened in California. GM needed somewhere to store the Origin vehicles and so it started trucking them to the former Grand Blanc tooling facility, which is still owned by GM. From a story perspective, it would have been much easier if the tornado had wiped the taxis out as it’s a simpler story to tell than ‘a tornado came within about half a mile of the parking lot.’
In retrospect, it might have been better for GM as well because rather than taking an insurance payout (if one existed) the company instead is having to write off about $583 million related to Cruise expenses as it halts Origin production.
From CEO Mary Barra’s letter to shareholders:
I also want to recognize the progress Cruise has made over the last several months. Our vision to transform mobility using autonomous technology is unchanged, and every mile traveled, and every simulation, brings us closer because Cruise is an AI-first company.
As you know, Cruise has returned to the road in Houston, Phoenix and Dallas and we recently made several significant leadership appointments, including hiring Marc Whitten as CEO. Marc has decades of experience on the frontlines of technology transformations.
The Cruise team will also simplify their path to scale by focusing their next autonomous vehicle on the next-generation Chevrolet Bolt, instead of the Origin. This addresses the regulatory uncertainty we faced with the Origin because of its unique design. In addition, per-unit costs will be much lower, which will help Cruise optimize its resources.
RIP Origin. I feel like it’s up to The Bishop to figure out what to do with all of those vehicles the company has already built.
This is great news for the Bolt and for Bolt fans. Boltists? Boltites? Bolters? [Ed Note: Impact wrenches? Those technically “drive bolts”… -DT] Back in 2023, GM said it was killing the Bolt as it was transitioning to a new Ultium platform. The company quickly backtracked after realizing how popular the Bolt was and said it would build a new Bolt based on an Ultium architecture.
Using the new Bolt as a basis for the Cruise robotaxi makes a lot of sense. It cuts development costs significantly and gives the Bolt a lot more reason to continue existing.
When will we see the Bolt? That’s a good question. It’s supposed to begin production sometime next year so I suspect it’ll happen later this year. Los Angeles Auto Show? Don’t expect sales until early 2026 at the earliest, however.
GM Now Thinks It’ll Make $13-15 Billion Because Trucks And SUVs
The headline here is that GM upped its guidance based on making about $2.9 billion in net income (EBIT-adjusted $4.4 billion) in Q2. This is the second quarter in a row that GM has increased its estimates, with the EBIT-adjusted income being pushed to $13-$15 billion, up from last quarter’s forecast of $12.5-$14.5 billion.
It should be noted that the income attributed to shareholders has been slightly revised down to a range of $10-$11.4 billion, down from $10.1 billion to $11.5 billion, but what’s $100 million between friends?
GM also gave out more dividends, which I’ve been critical of in the past. My concern has been that GM is boosting its stock price in the short term to placate investors when it should be making big moonshot swings like Ford. Maybe I’m wrong? It’ll be years before we find out, but GM was correct when it bet that it would make enough money from trucks and SUVs to cover for Ultium and Cruise disruptions.
Or, As Barra put it:
Great vehicles and better execution will continue to differentiate us. In SUVs, we’re in the process of launching eight all-new or redesigned compact, mid-size and full-size ICE models in North America, including high volume vehicles like the Chevrolet Equinox and our family of mid-size SUVs, which all have higher margins than the outgoing models.
People do love trucks.
GM Will Keep Building The Express/Savana Until At Least 2028
We have a lot of thoughts about the humble Chevy Express van, which has reliably trudged on year after year as a dependable van for hauling stuff. Good news for fans, according to this future product breakdown from Automotive News the Express and its GMC twin will live a lot longer:
No updates to the gasoline-powered Chevy Express and GMC Savana full-size commercial vans are expected before 2028. Future electric vans could be handled by GM’s BrightDrop electric commercial delivery van brand.
If the world is a more EV-friendly place in 2028 I could see GM finally dropping the Savana/Express for one of the quite excellent Brightdrop vans, but I sorta hope they just keep building it forever.
Ok, that’s what’s happening to the vans, but what about the cars normal people care about? The Camaro is dead, but they’ll eventually build something called Camaro. The Blazer is likely to die next year, though perhaps a hybrid upgrade could save it? The Blazer EV should continue to live.
Malibu? Yeah. Malibu is dead, though maybe the name could come back as an EV sedan? Everything else from GM is likely to get some sort of refresh in the next years as per usual.
Stellantis Recalling Pacifica PHEVs Over Fire Risks
I’m a big fan of the Pacifica Hybrid, and I highly recommend it for people looking to lease a minivan. Buying one, though, is a little sketchier. Stellantis build quality has always felt questionable to me and the Pacifica PHEV has a lot of tech crammed into one van.
Six recalls later and it’s feeling like that feeling was justified. If you look up the Pacifica PHEV on the website of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration you get the big scary “URGENT: FIRE RISK WHEN PARKED” banner, which not every car gets!
What’s going on? The Pacifica PHEV was already recalled for a fire risk and, it turns out, that fix didn’t fix it.
From NHTSA:
- On February 6, 2022, FCA US LLC (“FCA US”) determined, through the Vehicle Regulations Committee, to conduct a voluntary safety recall Z11 on certain Chrysler Pacifica PHEVs.
- On November 23, 2022, the FCA US Technical Safety and Regulatory Compliance (“TSRC”) organization was notified of a HV battery fire in a Chrysler Pacifica PHEV which received the remedy for Z11. FCA US TSRC is awaiting a second examination of the vehicle and HV battery pack.
- From June 2023, through December 2023, FCA US TSRC was made aware of five additional fires originating from the HV battery in some Chrysler Pacifica PHEVs which received the Z11 remedy. FCA US TSRC attempted to repurchase these vehicles for further analysis to determine if the recall remedy was effective.
- In April 2024, FCA US TSRC received a Chrysler Pacifica PHEV which experienced a post Z11 remedy fire in the HV battery pack and conducted analysis on the vehicle and battery pack. The battery pack was returned to thesupplier for further analysis and confirmed the presence of a torn anode tab in one of the cells in the battery pack. A second factor has not been identified. This discovery confirmed the Z11 remedy is not effective.
Fast forward to this month and Stellantis is recalling a bunch of these vans to update the software in the battery pack control module and to look for any signs of damage.
What I’m Listening To While Writing TMD
Dark horse song of summer? It’s Hozier, the “Take me to Church” guy back with a song called “Too Sweet” that is catchy as hell It’s got my kid singing “I think I’ll take my whiskey neat, my coffee black in my bed at three” in the back of our car. Honestly, these lyrics work exceptionally well as a country song. When are we going to get a country cover?
The Big Question
Is the new Bolt going to work? What would it need to be in order to work as a consumer product? What price? What range?
GM is just nuts. They need to make a high performance version and call it the Insane Bolt. Only available in yellow and green.
Don’t forget the special edition Usain Bolt Bolt.
It has to be:
280 miles
<185" long
Anything bigger, or more costly is going to compete with the Equinox EV. Anything with less range isn't going to represent enough of an improvement over the pre-Ultium Bolt.
Being overly long is a weirdly specific Ultium trait that I can’t quite figure out. The Equinox EV is a full 8 inches longer than the gas Equinox! Why? It makes no sense!
The new bolt I put in the lawn mower is working. I think R&D on a solid state battery would have a greater payoff than dropping 500 million dollars on a driver less room. Original people elevators were luxurious rooms for the rich. Now they are just a box with a button to push the masses up and down. If you can build a SS battery that can be mass produced a lot of current EV challenges go away. They only want to fund things that eliminate human jobs. PS Mom says Sturgill Simpson could do the Hozier cover!!
” I feel like it’s up to The Bishop to figure out what to do with all of those vehicles the company has already built”
They’re EVs right?
Toecutter is our man(?) for the job!
I thought Toe Cutter was the aero guy? That box would have to be redesigned to tear drop dimensions and the one person in the car would have to lay flat and peddle at the SAME TIME TO REACH THE OPTIMUM PERFORMANCE?
(I accidentally hit caps lock while typing and decided to leave it in since it looks better)
Edit: Maybe I missed the joke.
EV efficiency which includes aero, no pedal assist required.
Having looked at an Equinox EV, the Bolt will work only if GM doesn’t inflict their truly asinine Ultium ergonomic choices onto it. Whoever decided that the headlights should be controlled by the touchscreen should be beaten with sticks.
I am sure that won’t lead to a software glitch happening that keeps the lights on and drains the battery. Though that does happen with auto lights at times. But I would prefer that to just be a manual knob/stalk/switch
Another reason I don’t like automatic lights and don’t use that setting. Remote? Sure, don’t care. Edge cases are life.
Yeah I only have one vehicle with auto lights and it is my fiances tourx every thing else is manual so I don’t have to worry about them staying off or on. Though I did find out my FJ has somewhat of auto lights on accident I left them on but I guess they turn off if you shut it off and take the keys off the lights will time out and turn off but they are not auto on/off based on brightness like most cars are nowadays.
Old Subarus used to shut off automatically with key removal whatever the light setting (there was a separate switch on top of the steering column if you wanted to leave the lights on without the key in it, like while burying a body in a remote location or something). My GR86 (which is, like, 98% Subaru) doesn’t do this, instead it screams at you if you leave them on after ignition shut off, I guess to encourage the auto setting. I would gladly sign any disclaimer and give up all subsequent safety BS to have a new 5MT ’90 Legacy wagon (except better headlights, but even ~2005 efficacy would be good enough for me). I don’t even need a 6-speed as the gear ratios were probably better in the 5, anyway.
Hah yeah I am so used to cars yelling at me if I leave the lights on but my FJ doesn’t. My firebird does and I think my Cummins does (now I need to check hah).
That’s a GM issue, not just Ultium. The Colorado/ Canyon have the touch screen light controls too.
Indeed; the Honda Prologue appears to have normal headlight controls.
GM should have parked some mobile homes at the Grand Blanc tooling facility along with the Origin vehicles.
Why, as tornado bait?
What are these “moonshots” we’re talking about that Ford is making and Chevy isn’t? Are you talking about the Mach-E, to which chevy has the Equinox EV and Blazer EV as pretty direct competitors? Or perhaps the F150 lightning, to which Chevy has the the Silverado EV (which is arguably more of a “moonshot” than then Lightning, which is visually almost identical to a normal F150).
It seems like the only areas Chevy doesn’t have a direct answer to Ford are a couple hybrids, an electric van and the Maverick, but I wouldn’t really call it a “moonshot” to if your differentiators are “a couple hybrids, a truck that’s small and a low volume EV van”
Mach E Rally, maybe? Chevy’s not trying to compete with that. And I do think that the Maverick has been a heck of an investment for Ford, but it was really an almost certain success from the beginning.
Even the Mach E Rally isn’t really a “moonshot”. They just took a car that has direct competitors from Chevy and others and just made a trim that’s basically “add funny wheels, off road tires and a racing stripe”
True, I’m just throwing out the only thing that I could think of without a direct Chevy competitor. I guess the Escape PHEV, but Ford doesn’t even seem like they want to sell those, and it’s really not a moonshot. Bronco? Hard to call that a moonshot, either.
GM calls their low volume EV van Brightdrop. Maybe it would be better to call it a Chevy Brightdrop? Much better brand recognition.
For the Bolt, If GM was smart they’d have kept all the castings and would just start cranking out the last generation again. Slap the new batteries in, refresh the bumpers, fix the stupid tail light design leave carplay/android auto in it to save on infotainment costs, sell for mid 20s to start and call it day.
Also, this robotaxi stuff needs to just go away, buses/trolleys/railcar technology does it better/safer/cheaper. Having a bunch of robo taxis running around with 1-2 passengers doesn’t reduce traffic/emmissions any more than people just driving around in their own cars, maybe safer but mass transit options are still much safer, and simpler.
No it dosen’t. Trolleys and railcars require tracks to be laid which are expensive, come with right of way headaches and limit their range.
Busses are more flexible but still operate most efficiently along fixed routes with fixed schedules. Robo taxis are an on demand, straight from door A to door B solution, something buses/trolleys/railcars cannot do. Robots taxis aren’t about moving people from gas to electric, they’re about not having to drive or even own a vehicle.
They can however greatly improve traffic (in theory) by both increasing the density of the roads, increasing average speed while also increasing energy economy (drafting, steadier speeds, less lane changes, etc), and by dropping off the passenger and picking up another rather than circling the block looking for a place to park for the day.
I get the not having to own a car point, but just feel there are current technologies that could be expanded, like Personal Rapid Transit, or even just using dedicated lanes for robotaxis like bus lanes, with trying to get to full autonomy on regular roads with other regular cars is like trying to run before they walk.
I’ll be finding out soon enough as my city is building a PRT system:
https://usa.streetsblog.org/2023/06/20/can-personal-rapid-transit-really-replace-buses-and-trains
Given how it’s going with the local light rail (and its sister system in Sacramento) I don’t have much hope PRT will be much better:
https://sanjosespotlight.com/san-joses-vta-light-rail-trains-are-increasingly-empty-and-slow/
The problem is rail systems like this can only travel fixed routes. And those routes are not on demand, straight from door A to door B. PRT might improve this slightly but unless it can offer the same convenience as a car I don’t see it having any more success than light rail.
I think the new bolt will work especially if they bring back the bigger version one (cannot recall what that one was called) as people in the US always want bigger. And if the price is under 30k
They are only doing the bigger version on its return; they stated that months back.
Makes sense it seems I have seen more of those on the road then the smaller ones. Wonder what the sales difference between the two were?
The “EUV” which I hope they drop as a name as it was dumb.
Ah yeah that is it. Yeah such a dumb name. Like see it isn’t just a cross over it is an electric cross over.
Nothing beats hearing my 3 year old sing ” I take my whisky neat”
My 3 year old always preferred his whisky (and all other foods) messy.
Imagine thinking that, in 2021, designing and mass manufacturing a dedicated driverless platform is both feasible and necessary
Anecdotal, but my local HVAC guy had to fix something on my home’s A/C compressor a month or two back. He has been using a fleet of Ford E-seried and Chevy Express vans for the last 25+ years, and his personal E250 rolled over 600,000 miles last fall (he knows I’m a car guy, so he felt comfortable bragging about it). He, and I suspect many others like him, will keep giving GM money for a proven-in-use van, especially one that they can directly transfer their stuff from old to new, for as long as GM makes them. GM is smart to hedge their bets on the Brightdrop vans while keeping the “ain’t broke, don’t fix it” Express/Savannah twins around for a while longer.
Are these vans exempt from meeting any sense of modern standards?
I can only think that a GM van, designed and lived a full life before Ford even introduced the current Transit to replace its own ageing E-Series, would struggle to meet current safety, emissions, or any other modern standard.
In my opinion, cars reached a sufficient level of development in the 1990s (sure, make them cleaner with engine upgrades) – any user who only cares about functionality and not image and how many screens it has would be fine with the Express, or if Toyota kept turning out 1993 Camrys.
Safety has come a LOOONG way since then. As has fuel economy, emissions (as you noted) and overall reliability. Toyota and Honda reliability has not slipped as much as others have caught up.
Not disputing the body structure/crash tech has improved. Mileage has gone up incrementally on ICE but Hybrid is the true game changer ( I own an older Hybrid with 240k and it still returns 40 mpg). My honest assessment is buy Toyota or Honda if you want to keep it forever.
Reliable MPFI and 4 speed overdrive auto transmissions were the true game changers.
An older friend of mine was complaining about modern cars. I said that other than oil they are basically maintenance free for 100k.
No distributors, plugs, wires, carbs, fuel filters, vacuum lines, etc… always needing something.
MPG has gone up much more than “incrementally” especially when performance is taken into account:
1995 Camry I4 = 19/26/21 MPG
1995 Camry V6 = 18/26/21 MPG
2020 Camry I4 = 29/41/34 MPG
2020 Camry V6 = 22/33/26 MPG.
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=12001&id=12003&id=42015&id=42011
My opinion is ICE cars hit peak reliability between 1995 and 2010. Common OBD2 diagnostics, proven tech, limited infotainment. Any car from this era will rust out before it stops running if it did not have an exotic (turbo) drivetrain.
On what basis do you think reliability has decreased since 2010?
I hear a lot of people worrying about infotainment or unproven tech; I have not heard many reports of significant or widespread failures. These aren’t new anymore, a 2010 is 15 model years old by now.
Infotainment and the switch to CVT, more fragile 6+ speed auto trans. It also seems the direct ignition engines have more issues with carbon buildup in the plenums that port injected engines don’t have. The modern turbos also introduce another failure point.
Hyundai/Kia have has had widespread failures of direct injection engines. Jatco CVT is a known problem. Ford has turbo issues.
Most late ’90s car drivetrains were low stressed, proven technology.
I completely disagree with this. The ones we remember fit this description, because they are the ones that are still around. The unreliable ones have simply disappeared from the streets and thus from our memories. It’s not as if Hyundai and Kia were bastions of reliability in 2000 either.
The average age of vehicles has steadily increased for decades. IMO this means the burden of proof is on those who say reliability is worse now than in the past.
In my region more cars rust out than stop running mechanically so my experience may differ from yours. I love VTEC and other technologies. I also propose that a 2004 4 cylinder Camry or a 2000 3.8 Buick Park Avenue will run until the end of time with (or without) the absolute minimum of care.
Yep, this is my point. There were surely gems of reliability in the 90s-00s. I don’t mean to diminish that. But a lot of Kia Sephias, Cadillac Cateras, Land Rover Discoverys, Chrysler cloud cars, VW Mark IVs, etc were sent to the crushers at lower miles than we demand of anything sold new today.
Just yesterday this site highlighted a 200,000 mile BMW M5 that was still worth $30,000! At this point a modern car failing catastrophically before 200k is a failure.
Agree, I expect 200k out of a modern car, but am careful what I buy. I’m old enough to remember when most cars were about worn out at 60k. My first car at 16 was younger than me and falling apart with 53k on the clock. My newest car now is 10 years old with 240k, the oldest is 19 with 174k. All are in a condition that would put that malaise era barge to shame.
First car was 1978 LTDII coupe with a 351W. You could literally watch it rust if you sat long enough. A mile of vacuum lines and a temperamental carb. Kept a spare voltage regulator and starter solenoid in the glovebox.
I am not even talking about peak reliability, I am saying those cars had all the things most users want/need. Except a phone dock…
100% agree. The old Nissan XTerra commercial: Everything you need, nothing you don’t.
Which is why the Chevrolet Express is still around – alas, new car buyers clearly have different concerns than what they actually need, so don’t think I am advocating for manufacturers to start building old cars again.
I would like to live in a world where the majority of people thought that way, though.
One thing they did a number of years ago was drop the 1/2 ton version which at least gets them around CAFE and more strict emissions standards. Ford did the same thing with the E-Series but instead put E-150 badges on what used to be the E-250 and raised the GVWR on the E-250 by 50 lbs.
Why does there have to be a “new” Bolt? The old one is great. It has enough space, enough range, enough power, and a low enough price to work for most people who want an EV…not to mention it doesn’t weigh as much as 3 bedroom single family home like all the Ultium products do. GM should literally just keep producing it like it was with some minor updates to keep the tech and amenities competitive.
…but why would they do that? I’m sure they’ve got some 7,000 pound, $60,000 Bolt SS in the works because they’re GM and they specialize in shooting themselves in the dick and abandoning good products in the endless quest to make the line go up and suck every last cent they can out of their customers.
If they took the old Bolt (probably the EUV, since they are gonna go that way) and just converted it to Ultium, it’d be great (and still lighter and smaller than the rest of the Ultium family).
So they’re probably going to overlap it too much with the Equinox and Blazer EVs. And they’ll claim no one wants smaller EVs because people spend $2500 more for the nicer option that’s slightly larger.
The Equinox EV is more than 2 feet longer than the Bolt, pretty big for its size (actually it has more overlap with the Blazer). I think there’s definitely room they can upsize it some and still be in a good spot, closer to like the Trailblazer or Trax, which would probably broaden its appeal with more people even.
They absolutely could keep it small enough while still growing a little. I’m just guessing they won’t. The Equinox/Blazer overlap is pretty egregious. One has more rear legroom, the other has more cargo space, but they are way too close in size and utility. I’m afraid they’re going to position the Bolt too close in size, price, or both, and it’s going to lose the appeal of the smaller, cheaper EV.
Maybe…I wouldn’t put it past them but they are also just in a weird place in general in that smaller sizing. They seem to almost be playing with pricepoints more instead of smaller actual vehicles (like how the Trax is bigger than the Trailblazer but cheaper), and they obviously have gotten a lot of heat for pricing of their EVs thus far so I tend to think they’re maybe treading carefully.
My suspicion is that it’s easier to stick to relatively large vehicles with the platform. I don’t know how narrow they can go without significantly redesigning the battery packs, and I don’t know how much length they can give up without compromising range too much. I suspect they’ll do two things with the Bolt:
Lean into a wagon design instead of SUV/crossover, both so it can be a little shorter without losing much range and to shift the CUV buyer to more expensive models (if they can provide decent range with less battery, I’ll be pretty interested).
Make it feel cheaper. They want people to consider spending more, so they’ll drop features and use materials that feel/look worse. The Equinox already does some of this, losing auto-folding mirrors, wireless phone charging, and the rearview camera from the Blazer. I’d suspect the infotainment will be downgraded (perhaps an upgrade from my point of view) and loss of the little things like auto-dimming rearview.
It’ll be nice if I’m pleasantly surprised, but I’m not putting a lot of faith in GM to get it right.
The Ultium platform is gonna be a curse, making all of GM’s new EVs too large and too expensive. Even a chopped down Ultium will be too much for the job. Doesn’t Daewoo or Wuling have something more efficient at the ready?
It’s such a bad platform but they’ve invested so much in it that it’s going to be like herpes. We’re never going to get rid of it.
True, really all they need to do is increase the DC fast charging speed from ~55kW to 100kW or so with a broader peak, and simplify the batteries to be less expensive. Sounds like LFP batteries in the new one should take care of that. Make 15″ wheels available from the factory, since they fit fine. Pretty much anything else would just add unnecessary cost.
They have an opportunity to have a simple, cheap EV that is functional, without all the extra tech crap added in for the part of the market that doesn’t want anything fancy.
For the simple reason that the existing Bolt is not profitable. By taking the Bolt off the market and enshittifying it, they have the excuse to mark it up to the point where people will not buy it.
Yes, the new Bolt is going to work. GM has been doing this longer than anyone, and they had a hit with the OG. It’s not a huge leap for these experts to transfer this to a newer platform. I’m excited. I want an OG, despite the battery woes.
Chevy vans are Sequoia sized money trees. No change makes tons of change.
Predictions for a small GM EV that’s basically 18 months away from market?
Even as a thought exercise, that is an impossible set of questions. So…42, I guess?
I think any EV, including the Bolt, needs to achieve >300 miles of range to be mainstream successful in America. Y’all can shout at me as much as you want about what most people “need” out of their vehicle. The median range for ICE vehicles is about 400 miles. People (maybe especially American people) are not going to pay a premium for a huge drop in range, regardless of the ability to charge at home.
‘Murica! Rational evaluations of needs and capabilities are for commie pinkos!
Is the median ICE range really 400 miles? I’ve owned several vehicles that wouldn’t hit 300 miles of range regularly.
I doubt a 400-mile safe range (down to the warning light, so maybe tank size less one to one-and-a-half gallons) would be the case for any non-hybrid in the future Bolt’s size class or (relative to other ICE-mobiles, at least) price segment. An EV probably would need something more than the minimum to allay range anxiety, though, and it really should shoot for a 10% to 80% charge time of under 20 minutes.
Here’s a link, although the data is from a few years ago: https://www.energy.gov/eere/vehicles/articles/fotw-1221-january-17-2022-model-year-2021-all-electric-vehicles-had-median
My huband drives newish trucks and they seem to get 500-600 miles. I’m a small car person, and my ICE vehicles have been closer to the 300 range you mentioned.
tldr; people don’t want to have to plug in every day.
If I had an EV and a cord in my garage, I would plug in every day for a couple of reasons:
Me too, but if I had 300 miles of range, I wouldn’t sweat the few mile trip up to McD’s and back. But, I would otherwise agree and do the same as you.
Mmmm but charging cycles on your battery are important to the overall lifetime of said battery, so in reality you shouldn’t charge every day if you don’t need to. You’ll want to balance range anxiety and maximizing your battery lifetime. This does require more thought/planning than with an ICE vehicle, but for for daily driving purposes it’s not too bad to get used to.
This may have been true for NiCad batteries, but for lithium-ion chemistries, five separate discharge cycles down to 80% SoC together have marginally less impact than one discharge down to 0% SoC. “Cycle life” is a misnomer. Total energy throughput is what counts.
Just follow the mainstream advice. Plug in every day, and don’t charge over 80% unless you need it or you have an LFP battery.
I disagree on 300 miles of range, because nearly every EV on the market hits 300 miles or close to it, and sales are slowing down. Price is the key factor for most people at this point, and 300 mile EVs are too expensive. Chevy already proved that a low price on the Bolt can get people to adopt to 200ish miles of EV range if the price is right. If there were more 200 mile range EVs, the prices on them would be lower, and competitive with a straight ICE equivalent in actual MSRP.
Oh totally, price is important and EVs are currently way too expensive for the average buyer.
You might be right about the lower range/lower price but I just don’t see the average American new car buyer accepting 200 miles.
There are a lot of people that commute less than 50 round trip miles a day, and have 2 ICE vehicles currently, but would benefit by replacing 1 ICE with a 200 mile EV for daily use. Charge at home on 110v, and all range gets replenished. The current car market doesn’t have that vehicle for sale as new, so its though to prove, but lower prices will bring more people on board.
Also at this point in technology adding range means adding weight, and more weight, means they are less efficient. EVs need to go the old school Lotus way, simply and add lightness.
As a one and only car, I agree. For a second car for commuting or as a kid runner, price is more important than range.
“GM Will Keep Building The Express/Savana Until At Least 2028”
Hallelujah!
These vans are ancient dinosaurs, but they do exactly what they need to do: Put in work, day in, day out, reliable as the sun.
May they live unchanged forever.
And easily serviced! Even an engine changeout isn’t that expensive (and is DIY friendly if need be) compared to one of these undersized displacement high compression turbo hand grenades you’ll wait months to get swapped if you can find a mechanic with a lot full of waiting customers with required work that doesn’t possibly tie up several sets of hands who wants to take the job.
Sorry, I fell asleep what was the question?
I’m sure there’s a fancier formula than this out there, but to me 100 miles of range per $10,000 MSRP seems reasonable for a next-gen EV.
Also if the Express can just hang around a bit longer, it is eligible to run for President in 2032 (born January 1996). Can’t be worse than our current options.
COTD. I love that formula!!!!
Average age of a car on roads today: 14
Average life expectancy for an American born in 1996: 74
That would make a car-year is roughly 5.3 years/year
Being that it’s already been out for 18 years (and therefore eligible to vote if it were human): that makes it 95.4 years old in car-years.
Arguably, based on the last two American President’s ages, it’s just fine now to try to run for president.
If we waited until 2032: it’d be 190 years old in car years.
I regret to inform you that 1996 was *28* years ago, not 18.
It’s a tough pill to swallow sometimes.
148 years old. Oof.
It’s seen some things.
Especially the windowless white ones…
Sorry, me again. I’d love to see this chart for the current EV selections. Range versus MSRP. Does this exist??
Sounds like a good project for the site!
Range per $ of all EVs on sale.
exactly what I meant, thank you for saying it correctly
I apologize in advance for doing this…
You can buy an Aspark Owl for a cool $4 Million. Divided by $10,000 X 100 miles, carry the one….
So you would need to get 40,000 miles per charge!
I support this math, even if you made me do the math.
It is usually hard to imagine an EV with too much range for me, but I think you’ve done it.
Just to carry the exercise further though, to get 40,000 miles of range, you’d need something like a 10,000 kWh battery, which would weigh something like 100,000 lb.
Maybe the Bishop can create a rendering of what a car body on top of a battery like that would look like going down the road.
They need to pivot and make the new Bolt a large gas powered truck or SUV to take advantage of the coming Trump gas-only vehicle tax credits. It should come with a standard gun rack and a Bolt-branded semi automatic rifle too! Limited edition MAGA graphics can be an added cost option along with a “roll coal” button that releases a cloud of simulated diesel smoke on demand whenever the driver encounters a Prius or cyclist. Will sell like crazy! If Ford can pivot Mustang and Capri branding to vehicles nothing like the original, why the hell shouldn’t GM do the same with Bolt?
How did you forget the Truck Nutz (and Boltz?) add-on?
I call dibs on the Build Our Large Trucks T-shirt slogan.
Proudly worn by the *D*riving *O*ur *L*arge *T*ruck brigade.
The MAGA graphics would be subscription-only with an impossible list of tasks to complete before cancelling, but the Stun Bolt limited edition with special slaughterhouse graphics and a numbered dash plaque with Temple Grandin’s signature would be a tasty option.
“It should come with a standard gun rack and a Bolt-branded semi automatic rifle too!”
Bolt action rifle
Related to the Pacifica PHEV, we just got a letter that now they are covering the transmission for Unlimited Miles/Years since they have an issue that they haven’t figure out and they would rather replace it if needed instead of doing a massive recall. Their previous recall was to install a software to detect if the transmission is bad in order to alert you to pull over instead of just shutting down the vehicle while driving.
I just got that letter, too. At least I’m out of the year range for the battery fire hazard, anyway (for now?). I also already park it in the driveway since the garage is full of project car and motorcycles and shop tools.
Good, the Robotaxi was a stupid idea, anyway. In terms of practical application of funds, the Bolt is a far more worthy use.
I would like to see the new Bolt come in around $25K as base model with 175 miles of range. Then an upgraded trim at $28K with a range extender or bigger battery with 250 miles of range.
New Bolt will have to be a compact CUV with 250ish miles of range with an MSRP of $27,595 and then they’ll have a shot
The bits of information that have leaked point to the new Bolt largely being the current Bolt EUV with some drive system parts shared with the other Ultium platform vehicles and LiFe batteries to reduce cost. It sounds like a good combination for a capable, low cost EV but Chevy is going to Chevy this up somewhere along the way.
$27,595 after the tax credit. I hope is something like a Chevy Trax from a size perspective, I see them everywhere.
They’ll advertise that price, but the only version that they’ll build for the first 2 years is the $35,895 high-spec version. But they’ll keep advertising the base model price. At least based on past performance, that’s my bet.
Ford managed to deliver many sub-$25K XL Hybrid Mavericks in 2022 and 2023, so there’s at least *some* hope for an affordable lower-spec Bolt!
I am remembering what GM did with the Equinox EV and the Blazer EV. Advertise the heck out of the base model price and then not build any of the base models for a good long time. They have form. And Ford, while they *did* technically build some Maverick XL hybrids, it wasn’t enough to meet demand, and they surely bumped the hell out of the price when they realized what the demand was.