Chevy Bolt EV Forum banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
314 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I believe I will be speaking to GM "soon" about some issues re. the screens. So if they ask me: "So what would you do?" I want to have some well-thought out suggestions.

1. THE FLOW SCREEN: It is wonderfully good resolution. And someone put some work into the animation. But it all seems pointless. We have the 20 green bars on the left of the DIC and the Flow Screen simply repeats those. All one really needs instead of the green bars are two numbers:
"38 kWH left; 63%". If they are not going to do that, then skip the screen entirely. So

Question 1: Does anyone find the FLOW SCREEN useful?

2. The ENERGY INFO screen with a score combining scores on climate, terrain, technique, outside temperature. I find this one especially annoying. For example: Climate. It is winter here so my score is usually between -1 and -4. How in the world would one get a positive score here? It would seem to be impossible. Terrain: Well, we go where we have to go. It is usually hilly. Ditto for outside temperature. I find this entire screen ....useless.

Question 2: Does anyone find this SCORE screen useful?


3. The bar chart. Everyone likes bar charts it seems. As I posted earlier, there is a bad bug. But what should the bar chart show? I have some ideas and I will start another thread on this soon (my main idea is to use Wh/mi for the bar heights but label the axis in mi/kWh. Then a single scale will work for all situations and the average line will always be legible.

4. The DETAIL chart. Yes, here the mileage and kWh used since full are very valuable numbers. And the %ages for climate and conditioning are useful. But the pie chart showing those %ages? I cannot see the point. Might be nice to see the mi/kwh when the climate %age is ignored (though the conditioning should probably be retained as a cost of travel) since that is the true cost of propulsion.

Now, I value your opinions, so please tell me if you disagree with me, or what you would like to see in this nice large and bright screen.

Aside: Another bug is this: If one starts with full charge via HilltopReserve and descends a hill gaining 0.7 kWh, that 0.7 is treated as 0 in the various charts, because negative numbers are forbidden. Therefore if one wants to know if one has beaten 4 mi/kwh on a trip, one must subtract 0.7 from the energy used number, and multiply that by 4. Easy enough, but still...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32 Posts
My guess is the flow screen is just a carry over concept from the Volt. I had a 2012 Volt and it had that same flow screen, but was slightly more useful because it also showed the gas engine. So the flow went from battery to electric engine or from gas engine to electric engine or battery. It was a neat graphic to help explain how the car worked to passengers in my Volt.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,809 Posts
I value your opinions...
OK, you asked for it... :D

1. THE FLOW SCREEN:
I never use it and I agree that it seems pretty useless. All the information is displayed in a more compact format in the Driver Information Centre. But that's OK, it's not as if I'm being forced to use it.

2. The ENERGY INFO
Yeah, I assume climate can never go above 0, so the graph probably shouldn't extend in the positive direction. But it's probably the way it is for visual consistency, not a big deal IMHO.

My big beef with the Climate rating is that it's hyper-sensitive - it immediately pegs at -5.0 even if you use heat for only a brief portion of your drive. Outside temperature is similar to a lesser degree - it's been pegged at -5 while I've been driving around at 0C (32F) temperatures, and I know that the outside temp can go a LOT lower than that.

I find the terrain rating to be useful because the intent of the screen is to explain why your range or efficiency is good or bad, and terrain has a big role to play in that. I think this screen is one that you refer to when the car is new to you and you're trying to understand the factors that affect your range.

3. The bar chart
I'm Canadian so the Wh/100km shown by the car works great for me. The problem with US cars IMHO isn't so much the bar chart as it is the cultural insistence on measuring consumption instead of efficiency. That's why regen is problematic - you consume less than zero when you regen.

My biggest gripe with the chart is with the vertical scale - whoever programmed it could have done a far better job of bumping the scale markers to multiples of 5 or 10. When the scale shows 7/14/21/28 it's a lot harder to interpolate the values than if it showed 10/20/30/40. And the average line seems to detent to a nearby whole number rather than being the actual value.

I'd also rather see the "Present" stand-alone graph show the actual current efficiency, perhaps averaged over the last 10 seconds, rather than the efficiency accumulated since the last 5 km multiple.

4. The DETAIL chart
I don't have a problem with the chart as displayed, but I'd like a "reset" button I could use to zero the counters just like the bar chart has. Right now, if I don't have time to fully charge, I have to keep track of the energy used at the end of each trip in order to figure out how much energy I used on the next trip.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
2,564 Posts
I believe I will be speaking to GM "soon" about some issues re. the screens. So if they ask me: "So what would you do?" I want to have some well-thought out suggestions.

1. THE FLOW SCREEN: It is wonderfully good resolution. And someone put some work into the animation. But it all seems pointless. We have the 20 green bars on the left of the DIC and the Flow Screen simply repeats those. All one really needs instead of the green bars are two numbers:
"38 kWH left; 63%". If they are not going to do that, then skip the screen entirely. So

Question 1: Does anyone find the FLOW SCREEN useful?

2. The ENERGY INFO screen with a score combining scores on climate, terrain, technique, outside temperature. I find this one especially annoying. For example: Climate. It is winter here so my score is usually between -1 and -4. How in the world would one get a positive score here? It would seem to be impossible. Terrain: Well, we go where we have to go. It is usually hilly. Ditto for outside temperature. I find this entire screen ....useless.

Question 2: Does anyone find this SCORE screen useful?


3. The bar chart. Everyone likes bar charts it seems. As I posted earlier, there is a bad bug. But what should the bar chart show? I have some ideas and I will start another thread on this soon (my main idea is to use Wh/mi for the bar heights but label the axis in mi/kWh. Then a single scale will work for all situations and the average line will always be legible.

4. The DETAIL chart. Yes, here the mileage and kWh used since full are very valuable numbers. And the %ages for climate and conditioning are useful. But the pie chart showing those %ages? I cannot see the point. Might be nice to see the mi/kwh when the climate %age is ignored (though the conditioning should probably be retained as a cost of travel) since that is the true cost of propulsion.

Now, I value your opinions, so please tell me if you disagree with me, or what you would like to see in this nice large and bright screen.

Aside: Another bug is this: If one starts with full charge via HilltopReserve and descends a hill gaining 0.7 kWh, that 0.7 is treated as 0 in the various charts, because negative numbers are forbidden. Therefore if one wants to know if one has beaten 4 mi/kwh on a trip, one must subtract 0.7 from the energy used number, and multiply that by 4. Easy enough, but still...
Sorry, I probably shouldn't answer at all. I never look at any of those screens. I guess I ask this out of ignorance, what difference do they make?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
979 Posts
Agree with the above comments. With the following additional thoughts:

Energy Usage Score screen
Intriguing but too “abstract”. Needs a detailed explanation of what’s the “nominal” or expected condition. That is, a detailed explanation of the basis against which the comparison is made. And the formula used to establish the score number.

This could be accomplished by a much more detailed explanation in the Bolt Owners Manual. For example: Climate: (hypothetical example): nominal represents usage assuming Heat/Air in off position and fan speed at two bars. Each -1 score from nominal reflects each 1.5 kwh’s used by the climate system above nominal draw.

Similarly an explanation of Terrain: (hypothetical example) nominal load at 50 mph on flat paved road is 8kW as measured in EPA test. Hills, rain, snow, wind, road surface, tire pressures etc. are all influencers to score in this comparison. Each -1 score from nominal reflects each 1.33 kwh’s used above nominal load.

And the bar chart. I hate it. Vote for (as discussed in another thread): Tesla’s line graph in wH per 100 mi (USA) or wH per 100 kms (Canada).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
121 Posts
Not a long-distance Bolter, so I have no interest in any of those screens. Automatically fire up Android Auto every time I get in the car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
369 Posts
Everything I need or want to know is on the DIC enhanced. 99% of the time the center screen is on audio.
The Volt flow screen was entertaining because of the 3 way power flow but the Bolt's is kind of pointless.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
107 Posts
The flow screen needs to show more statistics on the battery: Exact % used/remaining, exact kWh used/remaining. Might be good to show battery temperature as well. Show the actual kWh consumption of the hvac system. Otherwise, the screen is just a pretty animation for your passengers, and it does little more than show that brake regeneration actually captures energy (duh!).

Energy info seems useless. But there might be room for improvement. The question that needs to be answered here isn't about what can I do better, it's about how far am I going to deviate from EPA estimated range? As pointed out above, you can't change the weather, you can't change the terrain. So this screen either needs much more detail on how good/bad your acceleration and braking are, or it needs to become a prediction of efficiency. Let's see all the factors that the GOM is using, and give us some intermediate numbers. And it shouldn't just be a range number, we already have that, but it should be an efficiency number. So I can see that outside temperature is expected to reduce my range by 30%, and my current speed of 70mph will drop range by 20%, so my expected efficiency is now 3.2 mi/kWh and I have 126 expected miles left with the current battery level.

Bar chart: I discovered a few days ago that the bar chart has a 2nd scale: 0-4. Mine is almost always showing at 0-8, meaning it's impossible to tell what my exact number was for any given block. So the bars become useless. Instead, I'd like to have numbers for each bar, so I can see that one bar was 4.1 and the next was 4.2. There also should be horizontal grid lines, probably at every 0.2 mi/kWh. But as you already know, this chart is generally useless as-is, especially since the average is so poorly computed.

But the bar chart might get a whole lot more interesting if they got rid of the reset button, and allowed you to see efficiency across marked ranges. Suppose I start a long trip, but I'm worried about my range: wanting to know if the cold weather means I can't get to grandma's house without a charging stop. I drive surface streets for 12 miles, then get on the interstate, but I know there's another 18 miles of surface streets when I get close. Having a fixed 50 miles average just jumbles up all the numbers between my previous drive, surface streets and highway. If I could use this screen to get an average for both the initial drive, and then the highway, and then the final drive, I'd have more information. But I don't want to just use 5 mile blocks, I want to tap a "Mark" button to start the next average. Each time I hit Mark I start a new range, but the old one is still visible on the chart (with an actual average number, not just a line).

On a related note, since you're talking to GM, give them feedback about the departure time charging: ask them to add in time-based cabin preconditioning, so the car can warm itself in the garage before I leave for work each day. There should be 2 times per day to set, and they don't have to match the charging departure time. (ex: I want the battery to be full by 7am, but the cabin warm at 8am)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
979 Posts
Sorry, I probably shouldn't answer at all. I never look at any of those screens. I guess I ask this out of ignorance, what difference do they make?
It depends doesn’t it ? There are hypermilers, wannabe hypermilers, and latent hypermilers like mathematicians or engineers.

And then of course there’s music lovers and heated seat lovers who by the way, are not necessarily ignorant people. The Bolt EV is a vehicle for everyone ! That’s why all the screens.

For the latter groups a thread could be started on the Music Screens or the Comfort and Convenience feature screen. (need a volunteer of course, to approach GM with the associated recommendations).

Example: While in the Carplay music screen I really hate :mad: to have to hit Energy button before I can get to the general Music screen icon which includes SXM / FM / AM / Auxiliary.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
314 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
DaV8or: This poster says it best:

-----
Suppose I start a long trip, but I'm worried about my range: wanting to know if the cold weather means I can't get to grandma's house without a charging stop.
-----

If I head out on a 230-mile trip I want to be certain that I am averaging 4 mi/kWh. Computing that from the odometer and green bars is no good, because one would have to memorize the odometer at start. The obvious answer is to use the trip odometer. That would work. But the trip O is the only place where I can see the lifetime efficiency (the only place where total energy use is stored) so my intent is to never reset that. [[One could make a paper note and reset it.]] [[The Chevy app seems very bad at its claimed values for these things, so that is no help.]]

So while there are workarounds, the obvious thing is to use the DETAIL screen (and perhaps bar chart, shifting to metric for an accurate number). That tells how much kwH is left and how many miles left to go.

But the fact that two of the screens are (in my opinion and some others) pretty useless supports your view to never look at them!


As for MPG vs GPM (wH per mile like Tesla or mi/kWh) I think both have their place. I could easily see getting used to the wH per mile system, but thanks to the Bolt's nice number of 4, it is a lot easier to compute Range (or how much charge one needs at a charge stations) using the MPG system. Of course, it is a big factor that US has long tradition of the MPG system (as opposed to GPM). Aside: The EPA now lists GPM rating on cars in addition to MPG. Whether car buyers look at it I cannot say.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
979 Posts
Tesla has predictive kWh usage for the currently programmed trip ! At least that's what I thought the Teslatifosi have said. Yes please, GM !
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,496 Posts
Put any of the free GPS apps (travel or exercise) on your smartphone, any of which record mileage . Set it to "zero" and let it be your "trip odometer". This is also useful for people who put snow tires of different diameter (circumference) on the Bolt. Instead of doing all the adjustment calculations, just "reset" the phone for trips. If you choose to not reset your trip odometer in order to have a "lifetime efficiency", this should work for you.

I am still learning so much on longer trips that I (along with my copilot) keep a chart, documenting several parameters including times, odometer, the three GoM ranges, mi/kWh, outside temp & (if using climate control) inside temp settings, cruise control settings, and charging times w/ kWh gained. For short, daily trips, including commutes to work, I simply drive normally and don't worry about efficiency or heat settings.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,809 Posts
If I head out on a 230-mile trip I want to be certain that I am averaging 4 mi/kWh. Computing that from the odometer and green bars is no good, because one would have to memorize the odometer at start. The obvious answer is to use the trip odometer. That would work. But the trip O is the only place where I can see the lifetime efficiency (the only place where total energy use is stored) so my intent is to never reset that.
This is of course a very personal decision, but I find it a lot more useful and practical to know the efficiency for every trip than the efficiency since I've owned the car. And that "since new" number you're taking care to preserve could well get wiped out if you ever need some sort of service that resets the software, so doing without the per-trip information may ultimately end up being futile anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22 Posts
GM's Lawyers probably got involved and told the vehicle designers to keep the center console simple and with no moving images.
They don't want any reason for people to be removing their eyes from the road.
If you run some "maps" app that you brought with you, then you are responsible for what happens.
I would suspect that most things on the display are designed this way. Remove liability first, then add features second.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
508 Posts
The energy flow chart is only useful to me for the 20 bar chart, which I like. The chart could be elsewhere. I hate that the clock is in different locations on different screens. I want to glance over to read the time, not search around the different screen displays. It is also awkward to get from screen to screen while driving and the menu structure is confusing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
173 Posts
Some great comments, all I can do at this stage is rift off some of the ones that mean something to me.


Question 1: Does anyone find the FLOW SCREEN useful?

I like the flow screen, but it or another screen should have far more information about the charging status. I mean, right now, when plugged in and charging we get a "rounded" kwh number on one of the dash templates. The whole point of this car is the battery, let's have some more information such as voltage and amperage and actual kwh numbers. I can understand the lawyers not wanting that amount of detail while the vehicle is moving, but stationary? Please!



Question 2: Does anyone find this SCORE screen useful?
SCORE screen is mostly useless to this Northern boy. So the car would be more efficient in warmer (but not too warm) temps and on flat ground. Whoopie?? A better tool would have some way of saying "what if climate was -40c and the roads were clear and my expected route had elevation changes of 12000'?" The relatively primitive Chevy app has a slider for battery and range expectations. Expand on that.


3. The bar chart.
As Sean said, the bar chart is useful here as it helped me visualize energy consumption over the course of several short trips. I would very likely ignore it if I had the current USA chart display.


4. The DETAIL chart. Yes, here the mileage and kWh used since full are very valuable numbers.
I'll disagree here, as my short trips around town and plugging in every night, reset the numbers far too quickly. Fortunately, the bar chart works as an historical reference for me. Now if the DETAIL chart had some history retention (say, last 5 charges) option, then I'd use it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
314 Posts
Discussion Starter #19 (Edited)
Here is my best effort at how to do a Bolt-style bar chart (I used 30 mi for consistency with a Tesla chart).

The bars and left scale are in the GPM mode (Wh/mile; linear scale) but the labels at right are in MPG mode (nonlinear scale, but that's life).

Average explicit number in the MPG mode, tho easy to give it in both. The white line is the avg. and can be read off either scale.

Negative numbers are allowed. Infinity is eliminated as a bar height, but rears its head instead on the right axis, but that could be removed for general public. This scale would work almost always with no change of scale ever.

Going down means less energy used, throughout the scale. And note that getting 252 mi/kwh or -252 mi/kwh are very close to each other: essentially the same.

Scale on left is linear. On right, not.

I do realize there are many ancillary issues: having this quit at 50 miles makes the bar chart a mess sometimes as someone pointed out.

But this chart at least addresses the issue of the illegible average (also the incorrect average of course). I got some ideas from the Tesla chart that someone posted on another thread; that was helpful.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,291 Posts
I believe I will be speaking to GM "soon" about some issues re. the screens. So if they ask me: "So what would you do?" I want to have some well-thought out suggestions.
1. THE FLOW SCREEN: Agree this is a hold over from the PHEV or hybrids. Really don't use it unfortunately. I'd replace it with on-demand reverse camera display. For when you do a lot of reverse maneuvers and you exceed the 5mph trigger that turns off the reverse/backup camera display.

2. The ENERGY INFO: I actually like this screen. While driving I will occasionally glance at the technique bar to see if I'm doing better. If it starts going negative, I may start easing up on my deceleration/acceleration behavior. I'd appreciate having some tips that you can get by touching various bars to help me figure out how to increase my score. Maybe a popup saying "you're braking too aggressively" or "ease up there, lead foot" or "too hot, are you aiming for well done or did you mean medium rare?"

3. The bar chart: I don't have a better suggestion. It's a misleading chart.

4. The DETAIL chart: I pretty much like this screen as-is. A few nice enhancements is keeping a lifetime efficiency and a since-full-charge efficiency readout here. Then we can use the efficiency reading on the DIC for actual trips where we charge multiple times.
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top