Maven Bolt usage

[Astros]

I know several users here have posted complaints about Maven Bolt users plugging up fast chargers in Southern California, so I found this figure I came across rather interesting. It was presented by Alex Keros of GM, and claims that 150 Bolts made ~27,000 quick charging sessions over seven months, or enough to use 8 chargers for 8 hours solid, every day.

On the one hand, I would hope that usage like this helps pay for the chargers and spurs additional development, but on the other hand, if the chargers up here in Washington saw that kind of use it would make long distance travel almost impossible because the limited chargers would always be occupied. Do people think services like this help or hurt EV adoption, overall?

 

[HGTZ]

It is just growing pains. Services like LYFT use a lot of MAVEN cars. And wherever they operate the Fast Charging Network gets an increase in use, justifying installing more Fast Charging Stations. At the end, with more Fast Charging Stations everybody wins!

 

[Feed The Trees]

Wouldnt people be happy that the chargers are getting use? Use = miles driven. Do they really care if those miles are by direct owners or simply chauffeurs? Did people expect they would have these all to themselves?

 

[God]

There are some very interesting datapoints to consider...
-According to the map, it's mainly only SD/LA/SF, which virtually everything is super congested so congested charging stations would raise an eyebrow for most...
- Most people who purchase EVs have reliable access to ICE vehicles in their household so usually those who take long road trips will elect to their ICE vehicle...
- Most charge at home followed by at work and finally public charging stations...

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

Did people expect they would have these all to themselves?

Subconsciously, yes they did expect that, once they got used to not having any competition for the use of those chargers. That's basic human nature.

It is just growing pains.

I agree. As the EV revolution progresses and EV ownership becomes less of an "exclusive club" only for early adopters, we are going to have to accept the bad along with the good.

 

[God]

I agree. As the EV revolution progresses and EV ownership becomes less of an "exclusive club" only for early adopters, we are going to have to accept the bad along with the good.

We're most likely heading towards automakers have two versions of the same model, ICE and EV, in which it's very difficult to tell which model is an ICE and which is an EV...

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

We're most likely heading towards automakers have two versions of the same model, ICE and EV, in which it's very difficult to tell which model is an ICE and which is an EV...

Well, I think otherwise. I think the era in which an auto maker like Ford would make an "Electric" version of the Ford Focus, or VW would make an "e-Golf" version of the Golf, is coming to an end. As the EV revolution shifts into a higher gear, EVs will have to be more competitive with each other.

Compelling EVs are built from the ground up; they are not conversion cars where the ICE powertrain is removed and an EV powertrain is awkwardly shoehorned into the hole.

 

[God]

Well, I think otherwise. I think the era in which an auto maker like Ford would make an "Electric" version of the Ford Focus, or VW would make an "e-Golf" version of the Golf, is coming to an end. As the EV revolution shifts into a higher gear, EVs will have to be more competitive with each other.

Compelling EVs are built from the ground up; they are not conversion cars where the ICE powertrain is removed and an EV powertrain is awkwardly shoehorned into the hole.

To expand on my statement, I'm thinking more along the lines of the Hyundai Ioniq, Honda clarity and Volvo's comment that every vehicle will offer some sort of electric drive-train...But since this is a GM sub-forum, let's expand on GM offerings...Rumors are the Volt and Impala will be axed, that leaves the Malibu and Cruze as the largest sedans...GM will surely offer a compact and/or mid-sized sedan EV, does it make sense to build it from the ground up or to build a platform from day one that can support multiple drivetrains?

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

...GM will surely offer a compact and/or mid-sized sedan EV, does it make sense to build it from the ground up or to build a platform from day one that can support multiple drivetrains?

GM's first actual production EV*, the Volt, arguably was a conversion EV; it shares the front end with a Cruze, and the passenger cabin is designed more like a gasmobile, with that big hump in the floor, rather than a clean "skateboard" EV design.

Contrariwise, GM's second production EV**, the Bolt EV, was designed as an EV from the ground up. What does that progression suggest to you?

Now, that's not to say we won't see any more multi-platform cars. Heck, just look at the Honda Clarity! If I recall correctly, that has four versions: Gasmobile, PHEV, BEV, and even a fool cell version! But I submit this is the sort of thing that's perfectly normal for a disruptive tech revolution. Different auto makers will try different approaches to making PEVs. Ultimately, the market will sort itself out into a clear "winner" for producing EVs, but that could well take as much as 10-15 years.

So yeah, we'll continue to see multi-powertrain "platforms" from various auto makers, probably for several years before they disappear. I'm just not sure we'll see any more from GM.

It's hard for me to see why the skateboard design would not ultimately become the standard, altho like most standards, there will continue to be some niche products which don't use the standard. The skateboard design offers so many advantages; how could any other design for a BEV challenge that?

Of course, it's just my assumption -- my opinion -- that it's the BEV variant and not the PHEV variant of EVs that's going to be the future standard. It may make more sense for a PHEV to use the basic Outlander design, with the gasmobile under the hood in front, driving the front wheels, and an electric motor in the rear to drive the rear wheels. That may require a driveshaft linking front and rear powertrains, which makes the skateboard design at least awkward, if not non-viable.

*As opposed to "test market" or "California compliance" cars like the GM EV1 and the Chevy Spark EV

**Yeah, I'm ignoring the Cadillac ELR, quite deliberately. I'm not at all convinced that deserves more than a "test market" label.

 

[Domenick]

Now, that's not to say we won't see any more multi-platform cars. Heck, just look at the Honda Clarity! If I recall correctly, that has four versions: Gasmobile, PHEV, BEV, and even a fool cell version!

To be clear, the Clarity doesn't have a straight up gasoline-powered version.

 

[Pushmi-Pullyu]

To be clear, the Clarity doesn't have a straight up gasoline-powered version.

Oops! Thank you for the correction. Shoulda checked online before I posted that.

According to the Honda website, the versions available are the "Clarity Plug-In Hybrid", the "Clarity Electric" (BEV), and the hydrogen-powered "Clarity Fuel Cell".

Interesting that there have been posts from several forum members here on the InsideEVs Forum about the PHEV version, and as I recall, only one member posting about the BEV. Is that mere anecdotal evidence that more people are buying the PHEV, or is it an indication of a trend?

 

[Domenick]

Interesting that there have been posts from several forum members here on the InsideEVs Forum about the PHEV version, and as I recall, only one member posting about the BEV. Is that mere anecdotal evidence that more people are buying the PHEV, or is it an indication of a trend?

I think it would indicate a trend. The PHEV is much more compelling with the Electric having only 89 miles of range. In 2018.

 

[God]

Any know China's PHEV qualification, is there a minimum range or battery size to be called a PHEV?

 

[Domenick]

I've never heard of any specific specification for a car to be considered a PHEV, aside from being able too operate in electric only mode, plug-in, and have an engine as well.