The Chevy Bolt Is the Ugly Car of the Near Future • Hacker News Board

Re: The Chevy Bolt Is the Ugly Car of the Near Future

#211

Post by EdHominem » Tue, Dec 20, 2016, 5:33 PM UTC

Spooky23 wrote: post #202

Neliquat wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you want to subsidize the anti competitive lobbying that made it so bad? Your attitude is the problem here.

Where's the dearth of competition? I live in a small city. There's probably 25 different auto makes sold by at least a dozen different dealership groups in my area.

... all of whom pay kickbacks. Meaning you get less car for your money. And even if you're one of the ones who plays the dealerships against each other, that's just to reach a reasonable price, not get a deal.

It's not like Tesla is trying to put the indie repairman out of business, they're trying to sidestep the big car companies' control of the industry even in the distribution side.

Re: The Chevy Bolt Is the Ugly Car of the Near Future

#212

Post by mikestew » Tue, Dec 20, 2016, 5:36 PM UTC

jwatte wrote: post #149

Spooky23 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doubt it. You can only get a service manual if you live in a right to repair state.

Yes, and those totally do not get resold on eBay... ;-) Electric AC induction motors have very few breaking parts. The things that can break are more along the inverter/controller (capacitors, FET avalanche wear, etc) and auxiliary systems (A/C, etc.) One great thing about electric cars is that you don't need oil changes, belt replacements, or spark plug tune ups!

One great thing about electric cars is that you don't need oil changes, belt replacements, or spark plug tune ups!

Name two of those three things I haven't done to our Scion (Toyota) xB in 12 years and 80K miles.

Happy Leaf owner here, but the reality is that, other than oil changes, modern cars are just as maintenance-free as an electric. Okay, I take that back, I did have to do a pads/rotors/calipers brake job on the Scion, whereas I expect the pads on the Leaf to last the life of our ownership (or maybe I'll have to do the same job due to minimal use).

Re: The Chevy Bolt Is the Ugly Car of the Near Future

#213

Post by mikestew » Tue, Dec 20, 2016, 5:40 PM UTC

vvanders wrote: post #48

forgetsusername wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tesla also includes the tax credit in their price. And at present they don't even have a car. Why are people so bitter that GM is competing? Is this not a good thing?

People are bitter because GM has a history of screwing the customer WRT electric vehicles. Many people wanted to buy their EV-1 but instead they sent them to the crushers. Like other people have said, GM is doing this to offset their truck/suvs and not out of a real interest in EVs.

People are bitter because GM has a history of screwing the customer WRT electric vehicles.

If by "people" you mean the general population, I'd propose that the majority of people don't even know the EV-1 ever existed.

Like other people have said, GM is doing this to offset their truck/suvs and not out of a real interest in EVs.

GM's selling an EV, does the motivation matter? Especially if it's to offset the trucks that people were going to buy regardless?

Re: The Chevy Bolt Is the Ugly Car of the Near Future

#214

Post by EdHominem » Tue, Dec 20, 2016, 5:42 PM UTC

forgetsusername wrote: post #123

NickM wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tesla is operated very much like a silicon valley startup. They're growing rapidly in the hope of becoming profitable when they reach scale. But they sure as heck aren't profitable right now. They have already reached scale, and are already profitable. They're just pouring their profits back into further growth. Yes, they're spending a lot on R&D, but that's not sending money into a vacuum, that's investing in the…

> They have already reached scale Compared to the rest of the car industry? They are a fraction of a percent of the market. > and are already profitable. They cashed in all their ZEV credits to achieve one quarter of profitability. How did they do with those backed out? I mean, they could be profitable, but going by last quarter is deceiving. > They're just pouring their profits back into further growth. You assume t…

> Or do you believe that these small-time Seeking Alpha authors are moving the market?

Attempting to, yes.

> It's an investing site. If you have a negative view of a stock why wouldn't you possibly short it?

Oh yes, of course. But if you write an article about it first, to try to cause the effect you're warning about, you might just be a scammer.

Re: The Chevy Bolt Is the Ugly Car of the Near Future

#215

Post by mikestew » Tue, Dec 20, 2016, 5:44 PM UTC

colechristensen wrote: post #36

pseudometa wrote: post #5

"Tesla loses money on every car too." This is false, Tesla averages $18,000 margin on every model S & model X it sells. "So how did GM pull off a $30,000 car with 200 miles of range?" It didn't. It is $30k only after $8000 of federal tax credits.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong. It seems like the battery packs on cars are engineered to manipulate people, and this would be an easy way of making two very different cars seem the same. Lithium batteries degrade. With heat, with time, with charge cycles. Article after article writes about how Tesla's battery packs barely degrade! 8% capacity loss over 100,000 miles. This has to be a lie. Unless they've come…

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

Lithium batteries degrade. 15-20% capacity loss per year.

I'll correct you with empirical evidence: there are a ton of five year old Nissan Leafs that, by your math, shouldn't be able to pull out of their own driveway by now. My wife drives ours to work every day five years after we bought it.

There are ways to cheat though, design your battery electronics to pretend to have a lower capacity at first and then gradually allow them to discharge more and more as the battery ages.

After five years, given the geekery surrounding the Leaf and other EV, I'd be shocked that someone didn't figure out that the Leaf doesn't really have a 24Kwh battery.

Re: The Chevy Bolt Is the Ugly Car of the Near Future

#216

Post by jgalt212 » Tue, Dec 20, 2016, 5:45 PM UTC

sergers wrote: post #162

jgalt212 wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is this fake news?

In comparison to specific lines/cars that are at similar price/market it's true. Model s is outselling BMW 7 series sedans and Model s is outselling mercedes S-class sedans. It's definately not a blanket statement, the volumes of mentioned lines are low

It's very targeted and therefore specious comparison. Merc and BWM have like 20 different models, Tesla has 2.

Re: The Chevy Bolt Is the Ugly Car of the Near Future

#217

Post by EdHominem » Tue, Dec 20, 2016, 5:51 PM UTC

smackfu wrote: post #183

vvanders wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are bitter because GM has a history of screwing the customer WRT electric vehicles. Many people wanted to buy their EV-1 but instead they sent them to the crushers. Like other people have said, GM is doing this to offset their truck/suvs and not out of a real interest in EVs.

Ancient history at this point.

Hah, reputation doesn't age the same way. It's like wine.

Re: The Chevy Bolt Is the Ugly Car of the Near Future

#218

Post by EdHominem » Tue, Dec 20, 2016, 5:58 PM UTC

colechristensen wrote: post #36

pseudometa wrote: post #5

"Tesla loses money on every car too." This is false, Tesla averages $18,000 margin on every model S & model X it sells. "So how did GM pull off a $30,000 car with 200 miles of range?" It didn't. It is $30k only after $8000 of federal tax credits.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong. It seems like the battery packs on cars are engineered to manipulate people, and this would be an easy way of making two very different cars seem the same. Lithium batteries degrade. With heat, with time, with charge cycles. Article after article writes about how Tesla's battery packs barely degrade! 8% capacity loss over 100,000 miles. This has to be a lie. Unless they've come…

> There are ways to cheat though, [...] A new Tesla might well have an actual 400 mile range the day it comes off the lot

That's not cheating, that's responsibility. That's presenting an honest product expectation. Cheating would be implying that the initial capacity would last.

It's also probably not the case, as people are pointing out. But even if it were it would actually make me think more highly of the company.

> What's to prevent a competitor to cut just a few corners on this strategy – don't give yourself as much future wiggle room so that you can say your capacity is higher?

Does it make it through the warranty period? If so, then what's wrong? For N years those customers had an X/kwh battery.

If not, lawsuit.

Re: The Chevy Bolt Is the Ugly Car of the Near Future

#219

Post by notatoad » Tue, Dec 20, 2016, 6:47 PM UTC

Neliquat wrote: post #188

notatoad wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that a bad thing? Afaik, the CAFE standards are applied over the total cars sold, not just having the car in your lineup - GM can sell lots of big Silverados if they sell lots of Bolts, but they can't just make a little electric car to make the regulators happy and not care if they sell any of them, because they'll get no benefit out of it.

That leads to selling a crap e-car at a loss to push your profitable lines. A race to the lowest common denominator is not what we need.

That only works if theyre selling at less of a loss than the CAFE credits cost. Which really wouldn't be that much of a loss, so not that good of a deal. It would still have to be a decent car to sell.

(This isn't a hypothetical, btw. You don't have to guess what will happen, the system has been in place for many years)

Re: The Chevy Bolt Is the Ugly Car of the Near Future

#220

Post by twblalock » Tue, Dec 20, 2016, 7:09 PM UTC

mywittyname wrote: post #205

twblalock wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Americans love hatchbacks when they are called crossovers, SUVs, or minivans. They just don't like the small ones.

They like the small ones too, the "compact CUV" is one of the fastest growing auto segments in the USA. Think, Honda HR-V, Toyota CH-R, Jeep Renegade, Chevy Trax, and Nissan Juke; the market is expanding soon to include entries from Mazda and Ford. Americans love the high seating position. I imagine Europeans would too, if they had the option to buy one.

Many similar vehicles are available in Europe. They just don't like them as much as Americans do.