By on January 7, 2016

2017 Chevrolet Bolt EV

The eagle eyes over at AutoGuide spotted something that we wished we would have noticed Wednesday. Chevrolet’s website let slip that the Bolt’s MSRP was $37,500 before federal and state incentives. And it’s still there.

That would satisfy General Motors’ CEO Mary Barra’s claim that the Bolt would cost “around $30,000” when it goes on sale … um, late this year? Early next year? Somewhere?

While it’s hardly solid proof, it’s a fairly good idea that Chevrolet will sneak in as close to the wire as can be on its “around $30,000” claim.

Of course, on top of the $7,500 federal tax credit for the EV, there are a number of state credits available that could push down the price of the Bolt into the mid- to high-20’s.

Screen Shot 2016-01-07 at 1.20.18 PM

Here is the disclaimer:

3 Priced as low as $30,000 after federal tax credit. Net price shown includes the full $7500 tax credit. $37,500 MSRP including DFC with tax credit from $0 up to $7500. * Tax, title, license, dealer fees extra. Actual savings from the federal government depend on your tax situation. Consult your tax professional for details.

That may be a shock to some — especially considering the Bolt’s compact size and mass-market potential. But it’s worth noting that a Nissan Leaf with its biggest battery, which achieves up to 107 miles, has an MSRP of over $35,000. The Bolt’s estimated range for a single charge is over 200 miles, according to the manufacturer.

(You can still buy a Leaf in Colorado for ridiculously cheap, by the way.)

It’ll come down from $37,500, is what I’m saying.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

101 Comments on “Chevrolet Bolt Probably Costs $37,500 Before Incentives...”


  • avatar
    bumpy ii

    Nothing surprising here. Volt pricing works the same way.

    • 0 avatar

      Have we forgotten TESLA PRICING?

      “$140,200 P90D Ludicrous”
      “$10,000 annual fuel savings”
      “$7500 Federal tax credit”

      Cost to you: JUST $122,700 + $1000 delivery fee = $123,700

      THERE IS NO WAY IN GOD’S GREEN WALLET that the Model 3 is gonna cost anything less than $50,000.

      • 0 avatar
        mcs

        >> THERE IS NO WAY IN GOD’S GREEN WALLET that the Model 3 is gonna cost anything less than $50,000.

        Given what happened with the X, I think you’re right. First out will be a Signature Edition and I bet it will top $50k. I wouldn’t be surprised if the loaded version topped $60k. Add in things like the largest battery, ludicrous mode, suspension upgrade, autopilot etc, the price will get there pretty fast. History has show they’ll place a priority on the loaded cars. Push the most profitable ones out first.

      • 0 avatar
        SCE to AUX

        @BTSR – You keep saying that, but such a price would be suicide for Tesla. There would be no daylight between a slightly used Model S and the Model 3, and that makes no sense.

        Sure, a fully-loaded Model 3 will likely top $50k, but GM is showing that a 200-mile EV can be reasonably priced.

        The Model 3 isn’t going to be a blinged behemoth like the Model S or X.

        Soon we’ll have the Hyundai Ioniq EV to compare to.

        • 0 avatar

          The Model S starts in the $70,000 range. A $50,000 car has a $20,000 gap.

        • 0 avatar
          krhodes1

          For perspective, a slightly used 7-series costs the same as a loaded 3-series, and BMW has no problem whatsoever moving loaded 3-series. People who can afford $50-60K cars like them NEW.

          Tesla’s problem is that the Model 3 is vaporware, and the whole supercharger scheme won’t scale with sales. Among other things.

          GM can afford to lose pickup truck profit money on the Bolt. Tesla doesn’t have it to lose.

  • avatar
    bball40dtw

    Boo this pricing. Boooooooooooooo!

    • 0 avatar
      APaGttH

      Yes, because GM should be a charity that sells product at a loss, they can make it up in volume. Because that business plan worked so well for GM.

      Last I checked, car companies exist to make profit for their shareholders – nothing else – nothing more.

      I’d rather GM sell 1,000 of these at a profit than 100,000 of them at a loss.

      This is just like when GM entered the midsize truck market with something legit. Oh that wouldn’t sell either, GM is crazy asking over $40K for the Colorado/Canyon. They can’t build them fast enough and it raised the tide for all midsize trucks. We win.

      The Cruze will never sell if you go back through the TTAC pages, it’s priced too high, looks to conservative. It sold, and it sold at higher retail volume, and for a profit, compared to the God awful Cobalt/Ion/HHR it replaced.

      The Encore will never sell. No one will pay upwards to $30K for that ugly little wart. Not only does it sell, it’s volume hasn’t even burped despite a long list of new competitors. The Encore created a new class of vehicles that will easily break over 200K units collectively in 2016.

      The Bolt answers a lot of questions and checks the right boxes (which the Gen I Volt did not).

      Seats five? Check (and of what I’ve read it isn’t a penalty box inside)

      Reasonable range that someone could do a full day of urban driving without worry? Check in spades

      Reasonably attractive, doesn’t look like an egg or a cartoon character? Check

      Cargo capacity that rivals a midsize sedan? Check

      Price point that undercuts the current 200+ mile rang electric vehicles on the market, and beats everyone to the game? Check

      Ya, Tesla says the Model 3 is going to be $30K before government handouts. They also said in the early stages that the Model X would be around $60K. The $62K version of the Model S only existed on paper. I’m not holding my breath on the Model 3 under cutting the Bolt. I think it will be far more attractive. I also think when you check the options boxes, looking at how Tesla packages options, to get to equivalent kit is going to send the Model 3 price through the stratosphere.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        I like the Bolt but I don’t like the price. It’s $4000 more than the 2016 Volt, with more restrictions. I want an EV, but why would I buy this over a Volt?

        • 0 avatar
          DeeDub

          Batteries are expensive. This has a lot more of them than the Volt, so it costs more to make.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            So why would I choose this over the Volt?

            Based on the new Volt’s range (53 miles), I would have to fill up maybe three times a year. Maybe. The extra stacks o’ batteries gives me nothing but the inability to drive to Northern Michigan after work on Friday.

            I like this car, and it checks more of my boxes. I’m probably it’s target buyer and I would purchase one. However, based on the pricing, buying one makes no sense to me. Leasing may for the right payment.

          • 0 avatar
            DeeDub

            I guess you wouldn’t. Someone with a 100 mile a day driving habit would. Diff’rent strokes for diff’rent folks

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            I’d have range anxiety if I drove 100 miles a day with this thing. A deviation in schedule could make it so I can’t get home (add winter, 70-75 MPH freeway speeds, etc).

            It’s probably my fault for reading yesterday’s article and thinking it may be close to $30K before incentives.

          • 0 avatar
            DeeDub

            If you’d have range anxiety driving a 200-mile range car 100 miles, I’d say you just have anxiety.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            That’s very possible.

          • 0 avatar
            mcs

            The 200 mile range will drop pretty quick at higher speeds. Cold can be an issue.

            This morning, at around 23 degrees, I managed about 78 miles range in my Leaf. That was calculated from actual power used and remaining battery (rather than the vehicles estimate) on a 50 mile trip and 58 to 60 mph (on 55 mph roads). Preheated and didn’t need to turn on the heat pump for about 20 minutes. Then seat heat and heat pump when I needed it.

            Range anxiety isn’t much of a issue where I live anyway. Loads of charging locations on my 50 mile trip if I actually needed one.

      • 0 avatar
        ajla

        We have been right about Cadillac’s cars though!

      • 0 avatar
        an innocent man

        >I’d rather GM sell 1,000 of these at a profit than 100,000 of them at a loss.<

        Well, they wouldn't be GM then, now would they?

      • 0 avatar
        fishiftstick

        Seats five and not a penalty box? Sure, as long as they’re all named Peter Dinklage.
        This is the same platform as the Aveo/Sonic/Spark. It most closely resembles the Spark, which starts at $12,270. Which puts that $37k price in perspective.

    • 0 avatar
      nickoo

      I think it’s an extremely fair price for what you’re getting. I suppose it will start at this price and go up for the nice model though…which is too bad because I would gladly pay 37500 for the model shown at CES.

    • 0 avatar
      tedward

      This is a phenomenal price. What’s interesting is gm has an electric car with double the range of its competitors. This is a massive competitive advantage, and not one that’s possible with an ice model. I guess the equivalent would be a car that doubled both power and mileage over its competitors with a traditional engine (because of the primacy of range anxiety when it comes to ev cars.)

      I’m no gm fanboi but they officially have the most compelling and real world usable alternative drivetrain offerings on the market now. It’s rather impressive, and I wonder how other brands are going be able to gin up enough ev credits now. Double the range is huge.

  • avatar
    Kyree S. Williams

    Of course that’s how it works. At least it’s not the same funny math that Tesla’s lease calculator uses…which figures your lease/finance payment based in part on how much fuel money it thinks you’ll save in a given month. And not everyone is going to qualify for that full $7,500 tax credit. Most people won’t, since it’s based on income.

    But, if it depreciates as badly as the outgoing Volt and the Leaf, people in the used-car segment will be the real winners. You can purchase a 2013 Volt for well under $20,000 at this point…and probably as low as $12,000. And it’s still very much a usable car.

    • 0 avatar
      DeeDub

      The federal electric car tax credit is not based on income, it’s based on the size of the battery pack. Bill Gates would be eligible for the full credit on a qualifying car.

      • 0 avatar
        Kyree S. Williams

        You’re right. I stand corrected. Due to funny tax math, you could end up netting far less than the tax credit as cash-in-hand…but technically the full credit would have been applied.

        • 0 avatar
          jkross22

          Kyree, I believe some states have changed their tax breaks on EV’s based on income. California has done so beginning this year.

        • 0 avatar
          Funky

          Kyree, I think your original comment was correct because one would have to owe at least $7500 in Federal taxes (after the person’s other deductions, credits, etc.) in order to take advantage of the full $7500 tax credit.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            Yup. So for those buyers who don’t file, or who do not have to file, but still want that $7500 tax credit applied, the best option is to LEASE.

            The lessor takes the tax credit thereby reducing the lease payments of the lessee (hopefully).

          • 0 avatar
            DeeDub

            I think you need to look up the difference between a tax credit and a tax deduction.

          • 0 avatar
            Funky

            If interested, one can check out this Washington Post article which explains how the tax credit is applicable for this type of vehicle. This article provides a concise summary.

          • 0 avatar
            Funky

            Link to article is: http://www.washingtonpost.com/cars/federal-tax-credits-for-plug-in-hybrids-electric-cars-what-you-need-to-know/2014/08/20/0ae02718-2886-11e4-8b10-7db129976abb_story.html

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            DeeDub, see the link that Funky provided. The leasing company claims the tax credit.

            Funky, I read an article back in 2013 in CR, IIRC, that outlined how those $199/mo lease terms worked for EVs, PEVs and Hybrids.

            Pretty slick. But I’m still not interested in anything that doesn’t have an ICE.

          • 0 avatar
            DeeDub

            I never mentioned leasing. I was talking about the tax credit as it applies to income, and how it applies to tax owed. It has nothing to do with either. No matter your income, no matter how much tax you owe or don’t, you get the full credit that the car qualifies for.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            DeeDub, my initial comment was to Funky’s comment that was in response to Kyree’s comment.

            For those people with an income that does not require them to file a return, they can still enjoy the effects of the $7500 tax credit by leasing at a lower monthly payment cost, and then buying the car outright after the lease has ended.

            Then the question becomes why anyone would buy a used EV, PEV or Hybrid.

      • 0 avatar
        krhodes1

        @DeeDub

        I am assuming this is NOT a refundable credit? If not, you would only get the credit to the point that it zeros out your tax liability. If it is, you would get a bigger refund even if your liability goes to zero – for example, this is how the Earned Income Credit works. If you have a $500 EIC, even if you owe no taxes at all the government sends you a check for $500. Pretty sure the EV credit does not work this way. So you need to have at least $7500 in tax liability to get the full credit. Probably not a problem for most people in the market for a near $40K car, but certainly not a given.

        • 0 avatar
          DeeDub

          You get the full credit regardless of tax liability, just like solar tax credits.

          • 0 avatar
            krhodes1

            Do you have a cite for that? I am looking at the IRS Pubs right now and nowhere do they say it is a refundable credit. That is in the second sentence of the description for the EIC, which IS a refundable credit.

            And here is the applicable portion of 2014 Form 8936 instructions:

            “If you cannot use part of the personal portion of the credit because of the tax liability limit, the unused credit is lost. The unused personal portion of the credit cannot be carried back or forward to other tax years.”

            In other words, if your tax liability is less than the amount of the credit, too bad.

            If the Gov has changed this for 2015, good for lower tax electric car owners!

            And here is discussion from Tesla’s Forum page:

            https://my.teslamotors.com/forum/forums/tax-credit-questions

            It is NOT a refundable credit unless they have changed it for 2015, and nowhere in the IRS Pubs do I see that they have done so.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            The EV credit does not have carryforward provisions, so it is indeed use-it-or-lose-it.

          • 0 avatar
            DeeDub

            I stand corrected, it is not refundable. So I guess if you’re planning an plug in car purchase, manage your tax withholdings accordingly.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            krhodes1,

            https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p17.pdf

            the what’s new section of pub17 for 2015. I did not see any changes.

  • avatar
    Pch101

    Batteries ain’t cheap.

  • avatar
    philadlj

    I never believed the Bolt would cost under $30K WITHOUT incentives, nor did I ever feel that GM was trying to make that claim.

    • 0 avatar
      SCE to AUX

      Neither did anyone else, and GM did make it clear their price estimate included the subsidy.

      Pretty much Aaron is the only one who missed it.

    • 0 avatar
      Funky

      It is unfortunate,though, that the Bolt is so expensive. Hopefully, Chevy is putting a tremendous amount of effort into going after a new type of buyer / new demographic for this vehicle. Because it is difficult to believe a “traditional” Chevy buyer would care to spend $30k+ on what is perceived by them to be a very small “economy car”. If it was bigger (like an Impala or a medium sized SUV), it would be a different story.

      • 0 avatar
        bumpy ii

        “Traditional” Chevy buyers aren’t anywhere close to the intended customer.

        • 0 avatar
          RideHeight

          Bullseye. Good luck getting those advanced-degree, stereotype greenies to sit behind a bowtie.

          • 0 avatar
            krhodes1

            The people I see driving Volts do not exactly look like low-wage blue collar types to me. The Bolt and Volt seem to be nicely complementary. If your use case doesn’t require the gas motor, why have it?

            What does surprise me a little is that they are doing it with two totally different vehicles. Something like the BMW i3 makes more sense to me. One vehicle, two powertrain options. The Volt powertrain in the more useful Bolt body would probably have more appeal than either on their own, given the current CUV lust.

            I think the electric commuter car is a very viable niche market. But at these prices I don’t see the value other than in “save-the-world” cred. Get under $20K and we can talk about saving some actual money on driving to work. If I still had a 30 mile commute like I used to, a super cheap eSmart lease would pay for itself, with the added bonus of super easy parking downtown when needed.

  • avatar
    Master Baiter

    So what this says is that an EV with reasonable range is 2X the cost of an ICE car, ignoring government incentives.

    The Bolt is an $19K car selling for $38K.

    The Model S is a $45K car selling for $90K.

    Since batteries wear out, these EVs will all depreciate much faster than their ICE counterparts.
    .
    .

    • 0 avatar
      carguy

      In the case of the Tesla model S, the batteries may outlive the mechanical parts.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al From 'Murica

      ICE powered cars wear out too. The electric seems less likely to nickel and dime me with thousand dollar water pumps and what not on the way out. Where will batteries stack up in costs to something like rebuilding a 10 speed transmission or replacing multiple turbos.

      I’m pretty firmly in the gas camp as I like trucks, but I’m not sure in the total cost of ownership equation batteries skew it when they do fail. It will be like any modern car when a major driveline bit fails…off to the crusher.

    • 0 avatar
      TrailerTrash

      and nobody here has issues with our government giving away 7 THOUSAND frigging dollars of our money to help promote the sales of these cars?
      Really???
      7500 dollars of government money placed on the hood of these cars?
      This world has gone nuts.
      I always understood nothing is fair…but it just seems these days all sense of fairness and morality has disappeared. Vanished into the likely false hopes and lessons of childhood.

      • 0 avatar
        DrSandman

        (I agree, in principle).

        But it’s my tax money I already paid. Add up how much you already paid in federal, state, local, property, SS, medicare, and other taxes. (Hint, it easily covers it!) It made me so angry to add it up, I don’t do it anymore. We’re not rich either, solid middle class in an expensive region, driving a 9 year old Saab and 11 year old Jeep. The way I’m looking at it, I’m just getting my own money back!

        • 0 avatar
          CJinSD

          Which is great and all, but if your middle class self isn’t paying their own way for government services, then who is going to pick up all the spending we do thanks to people that think government is the solution? Cloward-Piven is one thing our progressive leaders do believe in.

      • 0 avatar
        DeeDub

        Think of it this way: they’re spending our tax dollars to help transition the nation’s cars from Saudi oil to ‘Merkan electricity. What could be more patriotic than that?

        • 0 avatar
          JD23

          Not exactly. Imports comprise only 27% of US petroleum consumption and Canada is a far larger source for imports than Saudi Arabia, so it is more accurate to state that our tax dollars are being spent to transition away from American and Canadian oil. The idea that the US is directly dependent upon OPEC for anything close to a majority of its petroleum consumed is a misconception.

        • 0 avatar
          CJinSD

          We have more oil than anyone else. We can be oil independent if the people pushing electric cars get out of the way of extracting the most accessible of our oil. Renewable electric is about making energy a luxury good and eliminating the middle class. What could be more anti-American than that?

      • 0 avatar
        Master Baiter

        “and nobody here has issues with our government giving away 7 THOUSAND frigging dollars of our money to help promote the sales of these cars?
        Really???”

        Yes, some of us have issues with it. As it was said, “elections have consequences.”
        .
        .

        • 0 avatar
          VoGo

          Master Baiter,
          Are you aware that the $7,500 Federal tax credit for electric vehicles was enacted in 2008 and signed into law by George W Bush? I doubt most of the trailer trash on this site are.

          • 0 avatar
            TrailerTrash

            vogo…just go.
            To make such an idiotic statement is beyond accepting.
            I am against any corp welfare…and don’t give a darn which president or party gives it.
            I am a conservative when it comes to my money…and whether you are a big money GOP or DEM whore is meaningless.
            You, knucklehead, need to think.

          • 0 avatar
            Master Baiter

            “Are you aware that the $7,500 Federal tax credit for electric vehicles was enacted in 2008 and signed into law by George W Bush?”

            Bush, and his father for that matter, were not conservative. Neither was the policy of going to war in Iraq. Don’t confuse Republicans with conservatives.
            .
            .

      • 0 avatar
        VoGo

        Like many Americans, TrailerTrash suffers from the belief that government give-outs are fine, just so long as they don’t go to someone else.

        He’s happy to drive on the roads the government built with gas imported due to military protection, to send his kids to university with Pell grants, to live in a home made affordable by the mortgage interest deduction, to see that his parents collect Social Security and are protected by Medicare, to eat food made affordable by the green revolution the US government funded, and finally to use the internet, made possible by the US government (although not Al Gore, specifically).

        But the idea that some rich liberal long-hair is collecting $7,500 to drive a Tesla drives him batsh1t crazy.

        • 0 avatar
          CJinSD

          We’re importing oil because people with Vogo’s mentality prevent us from being oil independent. Creating problems and blaming others may work for statists manipulating imbeciles, which is why you should save it for influencing progressives.

      • 0 avatar
        nickoo

        Are you kidding????? Giving away 7 thousand dollars to actual tax payers as a rebate to encourage more environmentally friendly driving on us energy and in us built cars is the very best use of government collected tax money I could think of.

        Maybe if you had fought in a war based on lies, which was really for oil, which destabilized half the world you might agree? Perhaps another gulf oil spill will change your mind? How about paying for those wars or costs of environmental cleanup which are in the trillions (hint you are paying for them) or how about we keep empowering Saudi terrorists? Maybe we can even keep buying cars from Japan Korea and soon to be China? It’s not like we need manufacturing jobs here in the US, we will all just work at Starbucks. If this site didn’t censor, I’d tell you how I really feel. Just keep living up to your username. Maybe it will be your kids getting their legs blown off in the next oil war.

      • 0 avatar
        Pch101

        The math of subsidies, tax credits and tax deductions is not nearly that straightforward. Just because there is a subsidy/credit/deduction of X does not mean that other people have to pay X to make up for it.

        • 0 avatar
          TrailerTrash

          nickoo/vogo

          simply embarrassing reasoning. This form of thought processing and argument is stunning.
          Do you actually do this in public and around tables without everyone looking back in stunned silence?
          Made up facts and personal lynching without one bit of fact.

        • 0 avatar
          Big Al from Oz

          Pch,
          No matter how you attempt to butter this waste of taxpayer resources, it will still sell at a loss.

          The only ones who benefit are the middle class and up. They should be the ones who pay more.

      • 0 avatar
        Disaster

        You do realize our government subsidizes the heck out of every gallon of gasoline you buy too, don’t you? From corn subsidies for ethanol, to tax incentives for oil exploration and the list goes on and on.

        http://priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/

        • 0 avatar
          TrailerTrash

          again you miss the point…at least my point.
          This whole attempt at explaining away these incentives is to use the old religious fable…
          If you live in glass houses, don’t throw stones.

          If the sinning takes place anywhere, then it is OK to sin here.

          Nobody in their fair minds is OK with subsidies or corp welfare or any welfare that gives money unfairly.

          This is simply a manipulation by the state to force consumer spending. And we all know and trust the state judgements, right?
          Just as long as they are in agreement with MY judgements.

          And there is a strong argument against the use of electric grid, burning of food for fuel and even the true impact of gasoline on our environment.

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            TrailerTrash,
            I’m not sure on your source for your beliefs that the US government is a poor investor, but here are a few facts to keep in mind:
            – All the TRAP money invested in financial companies in the 2008 crises were paid back, and then some – the US made money
            – the reason we all have food is due to investments by the US in creating the ‘green revolution’
            – the way you are able to communicate is through the internet, again a creation of the US government.

            When you are ready to bring fact to the table, we’re all ears. Until then, all you are doing is ruining the reputation of Trailer Park Boys.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            Our friend “Trailer Trash” enjoys being hysterical. You’re not going to talk him down because he takes pleasure in freaking out.

            That doesn’t mean that the EV subsidies are the greatest idea, but this rant of his isn’t really about that.

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            I’m with you, PCH,
            Unfortunately, we are stuck with these halfway measures, like CAFE, ethanol subsidies and EV credits until we have a government that is ready to align tax policy with leadership.

            But that would mean higher gas taxes and road tolls, and no politician is getting elected this year with that as their platform.

          • 0 avatar
            Disaster

            Then you should be railing just as much about the oil subsidies. The EV subsidies are necessary to level the playing field. In an ideal world there would be no subsidies…especially when we see how quickly the system becomes corrupted.

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            Some people need to learn what the oil subsidies really are. They’re the same tax deductions for business expenses that every business in the country receives, subsidies for the poor to buy home heating oil, and tax breaks for farmers buying oil. That’s it. Some people need to ask themselves why they’re so easy to fool and so quick to believe dishonest propaganda.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            Type “percentage depletion allowance” into Google.

            It allows oil producers to depreciate more than the amount of their investment. Those who understand finance — OK, you probably don’t — will understand the implications of this.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            “Unfortunately, we are stuck with these halfway measures, like CAFE, ethanol subsidies and EV credits”

            EV credits treat EV adoption as a pricing problem, when it is a product quality problem.

            If the power storage problem can be resolved, then EVs will fly off the shelves. Subsidizing subpar batteries isn’t the answer — selling more of them won’t fix the technology problem, as the solution to that won’t come from the companies that build the cars.

          • 0 avatar
            CJinSD

            It is possible for a greater than investment deduction to occur when paying using a percentage depletion schedule instead of a cost depletion schedule, but it is also possible to wind up without recovering costs when deducting 15% of gross income instead of deducting actual cost. It’s hardly a smoking gun, and there are plenty of places where simplifying tax code is better than expanding a fascist planned economy.

    • 0 avatar
      mcs

      An EV with its instant torque, quiet and smoothness is a far better way to move a car than the turbo 4s and cvt crap you get in the ice world. It’s a premium powerplant – like a new version of a V-12, only better. A better powerplant is worth a premium. Clattering DI 4 banger with CVT 19k, 38k for torque, smoothness, and quiet.

      • 0 avatar
        TrailerTrash

        I have nothing against the EV. In fact, our Tesla S is extremely fun and the power is drug like. And we LOVE power!!!
        It is, however, still a mess and a big luxury lie. It is extremely uncomfortable inside. The door arm rest hurt in simple home to work driving.
        The interior is really a 45K car interior.
        My little brother just got his X last week. And already he is wondering why he is being warned by Tesla about the wing door use and the hitting against the rear door.
        He is told NOT to open both at the same time.

        But subsidizing my wealthy brothers for their life style is truly wrong.

        But the cars are fun to drive…although NOT in traffic.

      • 0 avatar
        CJinSD

        We only have crummy turbo 4 DI CVT ICE because of the same big government inclinations that are making the working class buy Tesla’s for the plutocrats.

  • avatar
    chuckrs

    Somebody else has to step up and pay more in taxes to offset the tax credits. On a Tesla, the $7.5k is a nice perk, but on unit cost and given the volume, doesn’t amount to much of an incentive to the buyer or much of a burden on the rest of us. What will happen when under $50k EVs ship in volume? As the late Sen. Dirksen observed, a billion here, a billion there, pretty soon, you’re talking real money. I’d rather see an investment in upgrading grid infrastructure to support increased demand rather than in stimulating demand our superannuated power generation/distribution may have trouble meeting.

    • 0 avatar
      nickoo

      Once a manufacturer reaches 200k sales, the tax credit goes away. It is an early adopter incentive to help get EVs into the market. I wouldn’t worry about the cost too much, the costs will come down on their own as battery manufacturing ramps up, but we need to create the demand first to get there.

      • 0 avatar
        krhodes1

        I don’t really believe that battery prices are going to fall that quickly. Tesla is essentially using laptop battery cells. Do you realize how many gazillion of those things are already made every year? Plus the added demand for the raw materials is likely to stabilize prices.

        But I could be wrong. A lot more money is going into battery tech research now, always hope for a breakthrough. On the other hand, the raw materials come from big, messy, not particularly environmentally friendly mines. Hard to do that in civilized countries. China could be the OPEC of rare-earths and lithium.

        • 0 avatar
          TrailerTrash

          See…exactly.
          The dirty little secrets behind these greener techs is not very talked about.
          And when the bad stuff is mentioned, then the resulting “goodness” seems to outweigh the bad.
          I can burn or chop up flying birds…but that rare river snail is precious.
          It is an inconvenient truth, as they say.

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            Just look at the facts. The Leaf was state-of-the-art 4 years ago when it came out with an 80 mile battery. Now, for the same money we are getting approximately equal vehicle, except that it can do 200 miles.

            150% improvement in 5 years – not quite Moore’s law, but still exceptional progress. At this pace, we are taking a range equal to most ICE 6-7 years.

          • 0 avatar
            krhodes1

            @VoGo

            I think it is much more likely that GM is simply willing to lose far more money on the Bolt than Nissan was/is on the Leaf. Again, even if they lose $10K per car, they are making so much on trucks and SUVs that it doesn’t matter. How many Bolts can they possibly sell? 30K, 50K at most? And that is being optimistic, Nissan sold 1350 hugely discounted Leafs in December. 90K in five years in the US, in a market of 10-12M vehicles a year.

            It also doesn’t seem like anyone ever paid anywhere near that much for a Leaf (maybe the first five they sold), my friend who leased one three years ago was paying $150/mo or so. And as we know, the resale on Leafs is utterly atrociously bad, so if Nissan was getting those lease prices based on an expected high resale value they are taking a bath on them.

            I’ll believe your range prediction when I see it. It could happen (I never say never), but I am not holding my breath. My BMW wagon will do 500 miles/tank, then 10 minutes later, another 500 miles, rinse and repeat. Going to be a very long time for an electric to match that, even at the price of a BMW, never mind the price of an econobox.

          • 0 avatar
            VoGo

            krhodes,
            Battery technology is improving rapidly. If you don’t believe me, go to Best Buy and check out new laptops. Light and skinny. Go to Home Depot and check out drills. Smaller, lighter.

            The Bolt is 150% better than the early Leaf because of the LG Chem batteries, not GM’s desire to create a vehicle just to lose lots of money on it.

            You’ll see similar improvements in the Leaf when it is updated in a year.

          • 0 avatar
            krhodes1

            Laptops are better because the power consumption of laptops is better. The batteries are pretty much the same, you can just do more with less battery when the CPU uses <10W instead of 50W+. There is no way to reduce the power consumption of a car by any major amount besides making it smaller and/or lighter. Smaller doesn't sell, lighter costs serious money if you expect the same comfort and safety. And batteries are HEAVY, which makes it that much harder.

            Battery tech is improving in the sense that we are now using better but more expensive lithium based batteries, but they really are not getting any cheaper. Those lithium-battery cordless drills are great (I have two of them), but they are also 2X the price of the older nickel-based battery drills. Replacement laptop batteries aren’t getting any cheaper either, though because of the reduced power consumption they are getting smaller!

  • avatar
    VicMik

    The design screams “I am cheap Chevy compact!” not the required “I am an EV and I care about the planet!!!” for it to sell.

  • avatar
    RideHeight

    “Seats five? Check (and of what I’ve read it isn’t a penalty box inside)”

    C’mon, it’s not even a Fit. Door and hardware size don’t lie as references for overall dimensions in oblique, deliberately distorting images.

  • avatar
    dal20402

    I want to know about interior quality. Is it enough better than the Trax it’s based on to be non-embarrassing for a $37.5k (or even $30k) car? Is it better than the Chinese knockoff of Fisher-Price that is my 2013 Forester’s interior?

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    It’s a pity that the government must use handouts to help a business sell a product.

    Why does the government stop meddling in industry. This vehicle should of never made it to the drawing board, or if it is manufactured let it sell for the real cost.

    I’d bet you would see the EV industry die in the ass. The money and talent wastd would then be put to better use manufacturing profitable product.

    What a waste of resources.

    • 0 avatar
      Disaster

      Like the handouts they give big oil?

      http://priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/

      • 0 avatar
        TrailerTrash

        interesting site you promote.
        First…it uses itself as the sources and never really gives out numbers and where the numbers originate from.
        Lastly…does anybody visiting these sites, such as yourself, understand what products come from oil?
        Do you ever look around your belongings and see what products used in your wonderful life are from oil?
        From your plastics to your cosmetics? Drugs? Medical devices?
        Besides hitting upon oil for just the gasoline…try to see the real, bigger picture here.

        • 0 avatar
          shaker

          “Do you ever look around your belongings and see what products used in your wonderful life are from oil?
          From your plastics to your cosmetics? Drugs? Medical devices?
          Besides hitting upon oil for just the gasoline…try to see the real, bigger picture here.”

          And yet we burn the stuff by the lakeful every day waiting in line at the drive-thru.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • sgeffe: Or the aftermarket will come up with a way, in the form of a doohickey which plugs into the OBD II port, as...
  • sgeffe: The Malibu is about the worst, with the Equinox second. When I’m walking to/from my work lot to my office,...
  • HotPotato: Having solar on your roof makes you MORE resilient if the power goes off (if you’re smart enough to...
  • HotPotato: Translation: California is paying me a fat union retirement pension, and I’m saying thank you by...
  • AthensSlim: When I renewed last summer (‘19) there was no option to renew without also ordering a new plate for my...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Matthew Guy
  • Timothy Cain
  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber