Chevy Bolt EV Forum banner

61 - 71 of 71 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
They shouldn't have cables at all. The conductors should be large rigid aluminum bars big enough to carry the load with minimal heating with silver or gold contacting surfaces. They're buried underground and as you pull in to the charger, autopilot takes over and positions the car in exact position under the middle of the car and the bars automatically rise and connect to the car near the center of the battery so that the current is quickly divided and length of conductors in the car is minimized.
 

·
Registered
Bolt EV, 2019, Premier
Joined
·
44 Posts
The wiring in the Supercharger cables is robust, but it probably wouldn't be rated for over 700 A by more risk averse companies. The public charging providers won't even go above 200 A (well below Tesla's V1 Supercharger standard) without liquid-cooled charging cables.

One thing to note, though, is that a cable's current rating is also partially determined by the length. The Supercharger cables are extremely short in comparison to the cables used by public charging providers. Originally, they were so short that Tesla owners regularly had to reorient themselves in the parking stalls just so the cables to reach. Those cables have since been lengthened, but they are still much shorter than anything you see at a public charger that must be able to support multiple vehicle formats.
This discussion points out a number of cool things to me. First, it's actually the 700 A part that's shocking to me. Second, it points out that one could soup things up a bit without shooting ones self in the foot too badly. If you really wanted to, you could monitor all of the wiring connections and taper back the charge if something started to "overheat" Eventually you could just announce that super fast charging was unavailable if the car degraded too badly. Then you could just void the warranty claiming the car had been abused. OOPs That would take some especially fine print in the owners manual someplace.

Obviously I love my Bolt EV. I mostly charge using L1 in my garage. I totally love the idea of being able to make long trips but it could be a great adventure. I mean 1 failed DCFC and it may mean L2 and a hotel. LOL

It would be nice to have a few more DCFCs. I don't think the state of W.V. has any. Mostly otherwise, for me at least, Tesla is not meaningfully better in this regard. But, GM probably should not listen to me. Maybe they could add a rapid zap mode. I just hope they don't wrap it up in a bunch of mumbo jumbo. What I love most about the Bolt is that it is a very honest car. You open the hood and you see the whole thing. Any mechanic could fix the thing.

I love the idea of self driving but I don't need something that I have to watch like a hawk so it won't run into a fire truck. To me this makes a car harder to drive.

I hate adaptive cruise control. I don't want to slow down when I approach a slower car. I want to pass them. Duh. I applaud GM for omitting it.

I could go on and on. I love tech. I design the stuff. I don't want stuff that only mostly works if I actually need it. If it's just a toy, fine. But, toys are cool too.
 

·
Registered
Bolt EV, 2019, Premier
Joined
·
44 Posts
They shouldn't have cables at all. The conductors should be large rigid aluminum bars big enough to carry the load with minimal heating with silver or gold contacting surfaces. They're buried underground and as you pull in to the charger, autopilot takes over and positions the car in exact position under the middle of the car and the bars automatically rise and connect to the car near the center of the battery so that the current is quickly divided and length of conductors in the car is minimized.
Well it certainly seems like they could come up with something better than a hose converted to wires. I can't blame them for taking the cheap way out. I mean one act of congress to support Cellulosic Ethanol and we are back to no changes required and carbon neutral.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
Well it certainly seems like they could come up with something better than a hose converted to wires. I can't blame them for taking the cheap way out. I mean one act of congress to support Cellulosic Ethanol and we are back to no changes required and carbon neutral.
That's right, hose converted to wires. They're supposed to resemble gas pumps and hoses and be familiar but in essence it also is like a lamp cord and at hundreds of amps, the lamp cord model quits working because it's just too hard to handle the conductors.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
785 Posts
Discussion Starter #65
On a very off topic reply glad they seem to at least adding lots of L2's in my small city in West Texas middle of nowhere!!
29403
IMG_20200528_172921.jpg
 

·
Registered
2018 Bolt EV Premier Nightfall Gray
Joined
·
98 Posts
Yeah, I don't think Eric really claimed to be revealing this so much as finding it out for himself and his thoughts on it.

When the Bolt came out there wasn't really any public >150 amp chargers out there. Even now they are almost exclusively the domain of Electrify America. So it isn't insane that GM hasn't gone to the trouble of upgrading it. Not to say they shouldn't, just that I get not going to the trouble of it yet.

As for L2, somewhat similarly I don't know how much benefit there would be to upgrading it from 32 amps. How many would actually take advantage of faster charging? We already have people advocating that L1 is enough (I disagree, but that's another discussion), would it really be worth the expense to install an 80 amp charger all would pay for but few would take advantage of? Even those going L2 might explore the cost to install a 100 amp sub panel and choose instead to go with 32 or 40 amps.

EDIT: Typo
Spot on, when the Bolt was in development, foreseeing > 150A chargers was not on the radar most likely. Right, or wrong, they engineered it for the current state of tech.

Others have added, it may be more than the socket, it might require higher grade wiring and possibly cooling. But, we don't know till we ask, right?

On one hand, GM may consider something like this for future models as a planned obsolescence reason to trade up. But Auto history has a lot of stories of after market upgrades, so why not. The dealer incentive for "elective surgery" would clearly be a winner for the service operations. Would I spend $1500 to upgrade DCFC 10%? Maybe, but considering trips are a 1-2x per year thing for me, not likely worth it. For someone like Eric who is tripping more than commuting, sure there is a compelling case for it. GM would have to consider how frequent people may elect to upgrade, its probably not worth the effort to re-engineer existing Bolts if only a handful would choose the option. But, for future models, sure, have a DCFC and DCFC+ option from the factory. DCFC+ being the higher speed option for an additional $500-$1000 or so.

WRT L2 upgrades, not so keen on that one. I use 30A at home, and it takes 3-4 hours but sits for 12 on most nights. So, no need for faster L2, or at least not with a steep price for an upgrade with little real benefit. But for those with small TOU off-peak windows, faster L2 might be worthwhile.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
43 Posts
It's funny, when cars could go 50 to 100 miles on a charge, it was " Range Anxiety ". Now, it is " Charge Time ". One of the posters on here mentioned that EIGHT MINUTES for a stop
was unacceptable. I have ridden my Electric Motorcycle back and forth between Los Angeles and Las Vegas a few times. Not pleasurable as far as charge time went, but great rides.
Level IIs around town are a good idea for local use. A business puts one in and you are their's for an hour or two. With energy cost averaging around 12 cents per KW, it would cost
a business well under a dollar per hour if they gave you the charge for free. I am guessing that you would spend more than that in an hour. Early on, I would be ecstatic if I saw a new
Level II along the highway. Today we feel the same about DCFC. I have been to a couple ribbon cuttings for DCFC units, the last of which completed Nevada's " Electric Highway "
designation. They aren't finished, but, the last install awarded them with the designation. Not sure how WE got it before California.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,558 Posts
It's funny, when cars could go 50 to 100 miles on a charge, it was " Range Anxiety ". Now, it is " Charge Time ".
It's kind of inevitable in a way, because range is eliminated by having a larger battery, and a larger battery takes longer to fill.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,715 Posts
I have been to a couple ribbon cuttings for DCFC units, the last of which completed Nevada's " Electric Highway " designation. They aren't finished, but, the last install awarded them with the designation. Not sure how WE got it before California.
My guess about "getting it before California" is that either :
  • the article author didn't do his research
  • the key is the phrase "first federally designated interstate electric vehicle corridor in the state and the Intermountain West", which could be an issue with "federally designated" or the definition of "the Intermountain West" (does that mean between the Sierras and the Rockies??)
I-5 from San Diego into British Columbia was "an interstate electric vehicle corridor" years ago (2013? 2015?) although quite a few of those were 20-24 kW "fast" (sic) chargers. It was possible years ago to drive from Canada into Mexico in an 80-mile-range EV. Not easy, mind you - possible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
Here in Washington State we have to pay an annual license fee on both EVs and hybrids of $75 supposedly to help install charging stations. Hopefully this will make it possible to put in chargers where they're needed to fill in a network even though they might not be economically feasible on their own.

The hybrid owners are kind of getting ripped off but without them there wouldn't be much money in the pot and they're not paying their share of the gas tax. EV owners have to pay $150/year for tabs in lieu of paying the gas tax, which at our combined state and federal rate equals 221 gallons worth of gas tax. Since I have both a hybrid and an EV I get dinged for $300/year but I drive too much to be paying my share for the roads, so I can't complain, but if I lived in town I might grumble a bit.
 

·
Registered
2018 Bolt EV Premier Nightfall Gray
Joined
·
98 Posts
Here in Washington State we have to pay an annual license fee on both EVs and hybrids of $75 supposedly to help install charging stations. Hopefully this will make it possible to put in chargers where they're needed to fill in a network even though they might not be economically feasible on their own.

The hybrid owners are kind of getting ripped off but without them there wouldn't be much money in the pot and they're not paying their share of the gas tax. EV owners have to pay $150/year for tabs in lieu of paying the gas tax, which at our combined state and federal rate equals 221 gallons worth of gas tax. Since I have both a hybrid and an EV I get dinged for $300/year but I drive too much to be paying my share for the roads, so I can't complain, but if I lived in town I might grumble a bit.
Similar story in CO. EV owners pay a $50 fee in addition to regular fees (which are inflated due to high MSRP on EVs). The $50 in addition to VW settlement funds is going towards both L3 and L2 EVSE grants. The grants are available to businesses (for workplace, retail, hotel), government agencies and multifamily homes to promote ubiquitous L2. A big chunk was granted to ChargePoint to install L3. All of our Interstate routes in the state are now adequately covered for typical long range EVs (assuming LR = 150+ miles), with scenic highways next on the agenda.

Given no other "Road Use" tax, I really don't mind the $50 fee if it helps fund more charging infrastructure, but I do wish more went to L3. One interesting side effect is many libraries and government agencies offer free L2, nice bonus in a pinch I suppose.
 
61 - 71 of 71 Posts
Top