Chevy Bolt EV Forum banner

21 - 40 of 40 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,554 Posts
With a BEV, no engine so infinite engine life. ;)
Motor and engine are interchangeable in standard English — an engine takes energy in one form and performs mechanical work.

If you see “engine” as synonymous with internal combustion engine, then yes, the Bolt doesn't have one of those, and you may feel more comfortable saying the Bolt has a motor. But interestingly, the same used to be true of internal combustion engines, because when they first appeared, “engine” was synonymous with steam engine, and so people called them motors, and hence “motor vehicles”.

But even if you think “electric engine” sounds weird compared to “electric motor”, the Bolt's electric motor serves as its propulsion engine. And this propulsion engine even has oil, an oil pump, and a cooling system. It even has a radiator! You may not ever need to change the oil in your Bolt, but there is oil in there all the same.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,554 Posts
When self-driving cars finally appear, I think suddenly commute distances will leap way higher. Right now to have a long commute, you need a certain kind of personality that can drive in traffic and be fine with it; as we've seen in this thread, that's some people but not everyone. But when we have a world where you can stop paying attention to the road and sit and read, do work, or whatever, way more people will be happy to have a 60-minute chill time at each end of their work day.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
633 Posts
FYI to all those that are having an argument/Nit picking with someone's statement.
THIS is the statement in the OP's post.
"Question for people in cold climates, for around the same starting price (looks around $36,500 with $7500 fed tax credit), would you now prefer Bolt or RAV4 PHEV? "

What you seem to be missing is that it is BASED on what each individual NEEDS are.

Also, again, not everyone can use the TAX Credit. That changes the field.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,078 Posts
Really? You're taking in the same information. I don't see how sitting on a couch or your car seat makes a difference. Plus 162 days isn't even a year. I think it's crazy to work at a job you hate just because it's 45 minutes closer than a better job. And that's WAY more than 162 days.
As I mentioned, some people (millions) don't mind traffic. I hate it. I hate that I can walk to a destination faster than driving when traffic is bad. I hate that accidents are commonplace and can double the commute time, or make it impossible altogether.

I listen to podcasts while working in the yard or in the garage, which is more productive than trying to stay glued to the bumper ahead. Then again, I work from home, so any commute seems a stretch for me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,104 Posts
THIS is the statement in the OP's post.
"Question for people in cold climates, for around the same starting price (looks around $36,500 with $7500 fed tax credit), would you now prefer Bolt or RAV4 PHEV? "
Perfectly valid for him to ask for individual opinions, but that's a sample of one. From a Bolt owner who's spent his adult life driving in cold climates, there's no agreement or uniformity of opinion and needs in cold climate driving equipment up here.

Some cheap out and try to get around with 2WD and all season tires. We put Nokian winter tires on our Bolt.

Some buy an AWD, but cheap out and try to get around with all-season tires. We have Gislaved winter tires on our AWD.

Some up here insist on the insanity of studded tires and thereby chew **** out of our streets and highways for five months of the year. We're encouraging our cowardly elected representatives to ban studded tires.

My opinion, the RAV4 is not a direct competitor to the Bolt or any real BEV. It's interesting how many hybrid owners begin the converstation with, "Well, BEVs aren't yet really practical for everyday use. Until they are, we had to go with this hybrid." It's a waste of time pointing out,
What you seem to be missing is that it is BASED on what each individual NEEDS are.
The Bolt will handle 99.9% of US daily POV trips. Seems every hybrid owner feels he's in that .1%.

jack vines
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,452 Posts
1) One may buy a house 60-90 miles from work because that is the place that one can afford to buy. Very common in the SF Bay area, BTW.

2) When my fuel-efficient, low-polluting PZEV gas-mobile dies, I will probably replace it with a PHEV. It would be a great complement to my BEV. I'd only use the gas about 4-8 times a year, 800-1800 miles, but 5-minutes to add 400+ miles of range on a trip is just too tempting. I'd still be driving electric 98% of the time (although less than 98% of the distance, as they would be all of my longer-range trips). Frankly, if the choice were between an extra 5 million people a year buying a PHEV or the same 5 million buying a gas-only pickup, minivan or SUV - I'd rather they buy a PHEV.
What does "Partial Zero Emission" (PZEV) even mean? It's either zero tailpipe emissions, or it's not. Period. You can't have a partial zero.

That choice of descriptions by the Powers-that-Be is ridiculous.

end rant
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,078 Posts
What does "Partial Zero Emission" (PZEV) even mean? It's either zero tailpipe emissions, or it's not. Period. You can't have a partial zero.

That choice of descriptions by the Powers-that-Be is ridiculous.

end rant
Agreed. I used to try to figure out what the acronym was. Plug-in, Z-something Electric Vehicle...

Try using that terminology in court; "I partially never assaulted the person", or "partial zero tax evasion"... "60% of the time it works every time".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,305 Posts
Discussion Starter #28

·
Registered
Joined
·
584 Posts
When PZEV began it also signified an engine so sealed up that little to no internal engine fumes escaped. And no dust could enter.

It amazes me that my PZEV Focus now at 140k miles still uses no oil and the oil looks clean for so long I forget to change it timely. I've read the Euro oil change interval for these is 10k miles. I generally exceed that, with the oil finally becoming lightly tinted but still full on the dipstick. This has to be a positive effect of the PZEV standard.

(Most of my miles are rolling along steadily on the freeway for an hour or so in mild weather, the opposite of the 'severe use' that specifies more frequent changes).

Enactment of the PZEV standard was a small step but definitely in the right direction.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,643 Posts
What does "Partial Zero Emission" (PZEV) even mean?
PZEV = "It pollutes very, very little compared to the average of other ICE vehicles".

Here's an old article from the NYTimes (2003) about one such PZEV :

BEHIND THE WHEEL/Ford Focus PZEV; A Stealthy Operative In the War on Pollution
By Jim Motavalli
Nov. 16, 2003

AT first glance, the Ford Focus PZEV, which combines gasoline-engine practicality with ultraclean tailpipe emissions, seems to be the gift that no one asked for. Car owners who care about their vehicles' evaporative emissions performance, or the rate at which catalytic converters heat up, seem few and far between.

But there is growing evidence that consumers will seek out environmentally responsible vehicles if they do not have to make a tradeoff in terms of lower performance or a higher price. Few people paid attention to fuel economy in 1987, when a survey by J.D. Power & Associates found that only 3 percent of consumers considered it the most important factor in buying a new car. But a survey this year by the same company indicated that gas mileage is now the top consideration of 15 percent of car shoppers, and the fifth-highest priority.

Thus, the Focus PZEV -- the label stands for partial zero-emission vehicle, one of many mind-numbing categories established by clean-air regulators -- has arrived at an opportune time. Although its mileage is not appreciably different from that of a regular Focus, its emissions are remarkably lower.

The Focus PZEV, with a special 2.3-liter 4-cylinder Duratec engine, produces just one-tenth of the smog-causing emissions that come from a Focus with the conventional 2-liter Zetec engine; the PZEV puts out just 1 pound of these emissions over 15,000 miles, using the low-sulfur gasoline sold in California, compared with 10.7 pounds for the regular Focus. (The difference with the expiring federal pollution standard, known as Tier 1, is more stark: that rule permitted 30.1 pounds over the same distance.)

One might expect such clean-air gains to be accompanied by fireworks and confetti, but the clean Focus, like about a dozen other PZEV models, has slipped into the market as quietly as a secret agent on a cold war rendezvous. While Ford has made its Focus available for test drives, the publicity departments at some other companies seem barely aware that they offer such cars.

Even environmental groups, focused on hydrogen fuel-cell and hybrid gas-electric technologies, seem only vaguely familiar with PZEV's. ''What are they exactly?'' asked the Washington-based press secretary for a group focused on clean energy.

This new Focus, like PZEV's from 11 other automakers, is designed to meet the strict new environmental rules in a handful of states, and they do so with mostly mundane, relatively low-cost modificiations to existing gas-engine technologies -- like revised catalytic converters that heat up very quickly to cut the pollution produced by cold engines.

California regulators, trying to clean up some of the nation's worst air, have changed their rules under a compromise with the industry. Originally, the California Air Resources Board had ordered carmakers to produce zero-emission battery cars under a complex system of credits that is part of the state's low-emission program. Tough revisions to those rules were adopted in 1999 to cover the 2004-10 model years. As a result both of automaker lawsuits and the failure in the marketplace of plug-in battery vehicles like General Motors' EV-1, the California board allowed automakers to gain credits from low-emission gasoline cars.

Because four Northeast states follow California's rules, PZEV's are also sold in New York, Massachusetts, Vermont and Maine (with some spillover to nearby states).

Starting with 2003 1/2 models, the PZEV powertrain became standard on all Focus cars sold in California and the four Northeast states, except for the high-performance Focus SVT, and the package is available nationally on 2004 models as a $115 option. Jim Cain, a Ford spokesman, said: ''In California, we do market the environmental benefits very clearly. But Focus customers will get a PZEV no matter where the environment is on their concern list.''

The potential benefits of PZEV's may be far more sweeping, at least in the short term, than the gains from hybrid cars. Tens of thousands of PZEV's are already on the road, at little or no cost premium beyond conventional gasoline versions of the same cars. New models are coming, and sales are expected to grow steadily. In contrast, only 100,000 hybrid cars have been sold in the United States since 1999, when the Honda Insight became first on the market.

Ford has sold 36,000 PZEV's and projects 100,000 sales through the 2004 model year. By contrast, United States sales of the Toyota Prius hybrid have totaled only 56,255 over three years, through Oct. 31. And despite the publicity given to fuel-cell cars, practical versions remain a dream, given the challenges of creating a hydrogen infrastructure.

Focus PZEV's start at a reasonable $13,915, including delivery charge. I tested a five-door ZX5 Premium,with a base price of $16,785 and a sticker total of $19,445. With a five-speed manual transmission, it had an economy rating of 25 m.p.g. in town and 33 on the highway, roughly the same as the standard ZX5. The Prius hybrid, with more high-tech features and a combined mileage rating of 55 m.p.g., lists for $19,995, making it tough competition, although there are long waiting lists for the 2004 model.

If you are looking for a car that makes a public statement, the Focus PZEV is not for you. Unlike battery cars festooned with decals or the oddly futuristic-looking Insight, the compact Ford blends into the background. There is no clue, not even a discreet emblem, that the car is far greener than the average Focus.

Still, it is more fun to drive than the average econobox, especially with the five-speed manual transmission. The car requires no sacrifices. Its small but energetic engine produces 144 horsepower, compared with 130 in the basic Focus sold in 45 states. The PZEV is a tight, zippy car, the kind you'll enjoy throwing into curves a little faster than might seem prudent.

Weighing just 2,600 pounds and aerodynamically styled, the five-door hatchback is handsome in a modern way, but also practical: there is room for four, plus luggage, and great visibility all around. My 6-foot-7 cousin even managed to fit (albeit snugly) behind the wheel.

I seldom have the opportunity to put test cars to serious braking and handling tests, but I had my chance on the Merritt Parkway in Connecticut when a Ford Taurus flew across the divider and landed right in front of me. I sawed the wheel, stood on the brakes, and made it safely to the shoulder.

After seven days of regular use, I felt rather virtuous, having used only a half-tank of fuel. And compared with the average 2003 automobile, the Focus PZEV produces 97 percent less hydrocarbon and nitrogen oxide emissions, and 76 percent less carbon monoxide. But not all environmentalists are convinced. ''PZEV's certainly help improve air quality,'' said Bill Moore, editor of EV World, an online magazine about electric cars. ''But they do zip for fuel efficiency or reducing oil imports.''

Nor do PZEV's reduce another type of emissions, the carbon dioxide produced by burning gasoline that is the primary greenhouse gas contributing to global warming.

Even if environmentalists are skeptical, and even though many consumers haven't a clue what PZEV stands for, the technology will soon be on cars across the nation, and it should have a profound and positive effect on air pollution. California rules say that 6 percent of carmakers' production should be PZEV's, and at the rate these cars are moving off dealer lots, that goal could be achieved. ''PZEV's are a fantastic outcome of the zero-emissions vehicle program,'' said David Friedman, research director of the Union of Concerned Scientists.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,305 Posts
Discussion Starter #33
Can the PZEV feature be disabled when used in non-CARB states in order to comply with the Federal Standard? I got lucky that I never got ticketed driving around in a Forester. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
584 Posts
A neighbor just showed up with a new RAV4 Hybrid. She had one as a loaner when their Dodge pickup was in for airbag recall, and liked it so much that she bought one immediately. (I think its a year or two old, she didn't say). She's the ideal demographic for this, with grandchildren to haul around and a handicapped husband who was having trouble climbing up into the Dodge. 100% of their driving is urban/suburban. (I always thought the big truck was silly for their application).

She said a major advantage over the large pickup is that the truck was costing $80 nearly every week to fill, while the RAV4 only has a 10 gallon tank, only needs refueling every second week, and gets "25, no I think 45" mpg. She is baffled with how quiet it is, doesn't understand how the Prius-like drive train works, but she definitely prefers driving it over the 4 door full size pickup. And she said it even has room in the 'trunk' for groceries so now she doesn't need to crowd them under the backseat kids' feet. We asked didn't she use the pickup bed for those groceries, she replied never.

One more convert toward slightly more rational transportation! EV owners are living a couple of (automotive) generations ahead of the rest of the world, this neighbor at least just stepped up one generation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
158 Posts
I did.

We always lived below our income starting after a first couple of years well educated but desperately poor. I retired at 54. Now 20 years after retirement and two kids through college, our savings equal the day I retired. I've noted in other posts our 'fleet' is 2005 and 1999 models, still in good condition, and I'll likely pay cash for a Tesla Y to last us the rest of our lives if its as good as the hype.

One huge cost savings was renting at first, then buying, near bus lines to commute to work. With this we still drove mostly but we didn't have a critical need for two flawless new cars every few years. That alone probably moved up my retirement date by five years. During several decades, used cars have only bit me a single time, when the $1,000 Datsun Pickup I had recently bought had to be towed home. I rebuilt its carburetor, no more problem. Everything else has performed as expected, at minimal depreciation cost. Decent used cars back then followed by moderate price new cars later in life has been a huge money saver.

I wish Bolt had the cargo space I need. (Second home is a hobby farm/orchard). If it did, I would drive one now.

Early retirement is great, everybody should try it. The secret is living comfortably but below your income. Unused savings compounds over many years, to a degree that most people don't realize.
Yes, Einstein said one of he greatest powers in the universe was compound interest. I will add that some careers have you changing your employer every 7 years or so. So it's not always possible to buy a home near the bus line; and not everyone wants to compromise on their home's location. I tell most young people to move to Utah or New Mexico if Los Angeles is too expense. To be honest, LA, NY, SF have been sold out for years--kind of like as a kid in Upstate, NY I knew Manhattan was someplace to visit, not to live.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,104 Posts
We always lived below our income . . . retired at 54. . . Decent used cars back then followed by moderate price new cars later in life has been a huge money saver.. . . . Early retirement is great, everybody should try it. The secret is living comfortably but below your income. Unused savings compounds over many years, to a degree that most people don't realize.
Congratulations on a life well planned, whether or not Raymond James gave any advice.

This is wandering so far off topic it's difficult to remember this thread began as a comparison of two cars, but that's how the internet rolls.

To go even farther afield, but it does illustrate just how clueless some are about the crippling costs of buying new and selling soon. There are few private party classified ads in the newspaper these days, but someone is buying Alfa Romeo and Fiat at auction somewhere and flogging them here. I noticed he's saying a barely two year old Alfa and has only 8,000 miles originally cost $50,000 and can be had for $30,000. Now, if a reseller can make money at $30,000, he obviously bought it for much less. So figure the original buyer lost $30,000 in two years, that's $3.75 a mile just in depreciation. Doesn't take an Einstein to realize that's a financial black hole, setting retirement back several years, compounded.

jack vines
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
584 Posts
...two year old Alfa and has only 8,000 miles... So figure the original buyer lost $30,000 in two years, that's $3.75 a mile just in depreciation.
That original buyer isn't going to understand and appreciate 'depreciation'. He might appreciate that he has to earn $8 (considering taxes) for every single one of the 2080 hours he works in a year, for his taste in cars. $15k / [52x40]hours. Kids buy Alfas. They're getting murdered if they trade that often. I think reflecting on this calculation continually throughout his workday would scare anyone who doesn't have a high salary.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,305 Posts
Discussion Starter #39
21 - 40 of 40 Posts
Top