Chevy Bolt EV Forum banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
114 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Dan Neil favorably reviewed our favorite Electric Vehicle in the week end edition today. Many positives, did comment on the seat issue, but all in all an excellent summary.
This article should stimulate more readers to take a closer look at the Electric Future.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
592 Posts
Posted in full

What follows only sounds controversial but it’s not: For a general audience, electric vehicles will offer a better driving experience than cars with internal-combustion engines. It’s in the nature of the mechanism, which dispenses with the trembling gas-fired whirligig under the hood, the transmission, gas tank and tailpipes, in favor of a murmuring electric motor(s), a single gearset, soft-singing voltage controllers and low-slung batteries.

For example, auto makers spend millions of development dollars keeping engine noise, vibration and harshness away from the cabin, lately including exotica like active noise cancellation, dynamic engine mounts and damping flywheels in the transmission. The Bolt doesn’t have any of that and at 70 mph it was so quiet in the cabin I could hear my wristwatch ticking, and my hearing ain’t all that good.
This is the main thing IMO - electric is just better once you solve the range thing. It's quieter, you have more control and it's easier to drive since you're not fighting a stupid ICE engine, combined with the lower cost of ownership.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,422 Posts
This is the main thing IMO - electric is just better once you solve the range thing. It's quieter, you have more control and it's easier to drive since you're not fighting a stupid ICE engine,
For true. Two years before purchase, we knew an EV would be better for our everyday use. That the Bolt is a really fun drive made it worth the premium price. That it has sufficient range is a plus. That in our frigid winters it can be remotely warmed without the guilt of adding pollution and wasting petroleum is yet another nice plus. We'll eventually sell off the ICEs and rent when we need one for long road trips.

When my wife has the Bolt and I have to drive one of the ICEs for short errands, it seems SOOO inefficient, noisy, clunky; just so last century.

combined with the lower cost of ownership.
You and I have already agreed to disagree on this one, because individual results/equations vary. As we drive relatively few miles and keep our vehicles a long time, the Bolt will never pay out against the already owned, already depreciated ICEs we have. We wanted an EV two years ago and finally bought the Bolt, even when the math didn't support it. Just too much more fun; had to go with it.

jack vines
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,044 Posts
People that do long commutes will see lower cost of ownership, especially if battery degradation isn't an issue. However, the typical Bolt EV driver did not buy the Bolt for the cost of ownership. Some people bought it because they love new technology, some bought it for the environment, and some people bought it because it is just so fun to drive. Not visiting gas stations is also a positive.

Heavy commuters should really take a look at this car, especially in areas like LA or the Bay Area. After all the subsidies the car is under $25,000 in these area, plus the more mileage you put on the car it makes more and more sense. I am saving $1000 plus on energy driving the Bolt and that is comparing it to a Ford Fusion Hybrid. If you have solar panels with net metering, the car is basically free to drive. After I get my solar panels I will be saving about $2000 a year on energy from switching to the Bolt. If my battery can last 10 years and 250,000 miles plus, that would be a savings of $20,000. All this is speculative because net metering could go away, I could total my car tomorrow, or my wife could steal my Bolt and I will be stuck driving the ice car.

For long commuters in California with solar panels, the Bolt could be basically free to drive compared to an ICE car. The Bolt cost me $25,000 and saving $2000 in energy per year for 10 years would make the Bolt a $5000 car compared to a $25,000 ICE car. Plus the savings don't stop there. I estimate it would cost about $2000 in oil changes for the 10 years.

For commutes of over 100 miles per day, the Bolt has a much lower cost of ownership than any $25,000 car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
392 Posts
For true. Two years before purchase, we knew an EV would be better for our everyday use. That the Bolt is a really fun drive made it worth the premium price. That it has sufficient range is a plus. That in our frigid winters it can be remotely warmed without the guilt of adding pollution and wasting petroleum is yet another nice plus. We'll eventually sell off the ICEs and rent when we need one for long road trips.

When my wife has the Bolt and I have to drive one of the ICEs for short errands, it seems SOOO inefficient, noisy, clunky; just so last century.

You and I have already agreed to disagree on this one, because individual results/equations vary. As we drive relatively few miles and keep our vehicles a long time, the Bolt will never pay out against the already owned, already depreciated ICEs we have. We wanted an EV two years ago and finally bought the Bolt, even when the math didn't support it. Just too much more fun; had to go with it.

jack vines

Jack your reason does not hold true. You can insert a brand new ICE to buy instead of a Bolt and its the same argument. The logic you use is no different for any vehicle. Therefore one can also say that EV users using LCO as a reason are misusing this too. I never in my 40 years of driving ever looked at LCO, I just know that all vehicles are a depreciating asset and that as soon as you drive a new one off the lot you lost money..... so I drive them until they cant be driven any longer, or the repairs / maintenance becomes greater than the payment on a new one. If you get a well built car you should have a period where you LCO drops way down before the repairs start to catch up.

LCO is also relative - I stepped out of a 2004 Toyota Tundra Double Cab 4x4! - One can truly say my cost of ownership will be lower. I used to joke to people when I went on long trips I would have to call for in flight refueling.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,422 Posts
Jack your reason does not hold true. You can insert a brand new ICE to buy instead of a Bolt and its the same argument. The logic you use is no different for any vehicle. Therefore one can also say that EV users using LCO as a reason are misusing this too. I never in my 40 years of driving ever looked at LCO, I just know that all vehicles are a depreciating asset and that as soon as you drive a new one off the lot you lost money..... so I drive them until they cant be driven any longer, or the repairs / maintenance becomes greater than the payment on a new one. If you get a well built car you should have a period where you LCO drops way down before the repairs start to catch up.

LCO is also relative - I stepped out of a 2004 Toyota Tundra Double Cab 4x4! - One can truly say my cost of ownership will be lower. I used to joke to people when I went on long trips I would have to call for in flight refueling.
Having difficulty following your logic as to why my logic does not hold true. It seems we agree on the basics; any new vehicle is a rapidly depreciating asset. The current average first year depreciation for new vehicles is 25%. It may or may not hold true for the Bolt, but that would be $10,750 just vanished. https://www.trustedchoice.com/insurance-articles/wheels-wings-motors/car-depreciation/There is no math which will cost justify a new vehicle for all but the outlier user. The rest is picking the flyshit out of the pepper; it never pays off for most of us.

We have three serviceable paid-for ICEs. Figuring $1000 annual fuel cost, driving the Bolt instead of any one of those, the fuel savings will never begin to cover the cost of Bolt ownership. We could continue to maintain those indefinitely for less than the cost of the first year's depreciation on the Bolt.

Bottom line - it seems we're pretty much in agreement on the concept.

jack vines
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
739 Posts
Having difficulty following your logic as to why my logic does not hold true.
Well, my logic is the Bolt EV is absolutely perfect. The logic is simple, requires no argument on my part, and I can sit back and enjoy driving while others try to think up arguments to the converse. ;-)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
782 Posts
if both cars depreciate at the same rate - the Bolt is cheaper to operation - lower cost in maintenance and lower cost per-mile…

same depreciation, lower operating costs - EV wins - simple - it's not about getting your money "back" - that's not going to happen - but both cars cost money to operate, and both cars depreciate - don't you want one that is cheaper to operate?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
107 Posts
There is another big intangible you both are missing. How many of you enjoy having to take your car to the dealer for service? I know for me I hate doing it and my wife will only do it if she has no other choice. It costs you time out of your day whether you sit at the dealership waiting for the service or drop it off and then go pick it up. It always takes longer than they said it would and it can be an expensive experience, sometimes unexpectedly so. That once or twice a year hassle is now out of my life. I can get the tires rotated at lots of places on my schedule and usually very quickly. Further it is not something I absolutely have to do. If I don't care about uneven wear, I can skip it and just replace the tires a little more frequently.

How much is your time worth to you to be spending it at the dealership?
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top