2023 Chevy Bolt EUV Redline: Super Cruisin' to Superchargin' 

Thanks! Good to know.

Yes, $0.48 would be expensive, but that's the non-member price. Member pricing is $0.36 per kWh. The Superchargers are $0.55 per kWh.

Fast charging is overrated, but great when you need it

​@rp9674 I just did a 6,640 mile roadtrip in my Model 7. 6kw charging would be stupid... lol

How do you know which Tesla chargers have been unlocked for other EV to use.

Chevy has bungle the Volt in all levels. First allowing dealerships mistakes, stop production,capping the charging speed etc Etc . Like you stated they could had owned the entry level ev market but instead they dropped the ball.

Thanks! You still have a lot of options out there. For the money, I think the Hyundai/KIA E-GMP cars are every bit as good as the Teslas; however, the lack of a full tax credit will hurt them. As for GM, I wouldn't be worried. While I'd like to see them offer (even retroactively) a 200 A CCS socket upgrade for the Bolt EV/EUV, that would still be nowhere near enough to compete with the next generation of faster charging EVs, including GM's own Ultium line. Keep in mind, while the Bolt EV is one of the slowest DC charging EVs in kW on the market right now, GM also makes the absolute fastest charging EV on the market (the GMC HUMMER EV). At the end of the day, DC fast charging really is much ado about nothing for most EV owners. 90% of charging is done slowly at home or work, and that's with 200-mile range EVs. With the next generation of EVs approaching 300 to 400 miles of range on average, DC fast charging simply won't be a concern. Most stations will sit completely empty 80% to 90% of the time, and the only ones that will be truly busy are destination DC charging sites and the sites that support full, pull-through parking (because EVs that are towing will be the #1 user of public DC fast charging).

I've been critical of the Bolt EV's max current limit for a while, but just wait until I post my site review, where I criticize the output power limits of the Superchargers and CCS1 adapters. 🙂

Nonsense. Due to the Bolts efficiency it takes less time to charge the middle 50% of capacity at a 150kw charger than an F-150 lightning does. If the chargers are clogged up it wont be due to Bolts.

@@homomorphic It's not nonsense. 50KW charging was ok 5 years ago. Not today.

@@thayne559 the F-150 charges at a lower number of miles per minute than the Bolt on a 150kW charger. So if it is ok for the 2023 lightning it's ok for the Bolt. The only metric that matters is miles per minute because that determines how long a car spends at the charger. The comment is nonsense .

I have wondered if that can be done with a software update. I suspect that the hardware is not capable.

@@homomorphic F-150 charge rate is subpar too.

Yes, they state on the website that using Super Cruise is only recommended for divided roads, but many of the roads shown on their map of active roads aren't divided.

​@newscoulomb3705 did you toggle off for Bolt EUV on the Super Cruise map? Otherwise it might just be in error.

@@AndrewMackoul I was looking at the main map. I wanted to see what the difference was.

@@newscoulomb3705 Yeah. I have Super Cruise with my launch edition version. It works great. I have seen a few odd times where it thinks there's no road information even though I've used it before on that same stretch. One thing that strikes me odd, I had a chance to use Super Cruise right after a newly redone section of highway. The road location, lanes, curves were all different but Super Cruise worked no problem. It makes me wonder what the real reason the mapping and subscription cost really is for? Super Cruise works in construction areas even if the lanes shift back and forth, so it does definitely work on its own.

Thanks! That's good to know! Before, I was having to rely on the map from the LYRIQ. Hopefully, I'll be able to test out Super Cruise on that soon. The updated/refreshed Bolt EV should probably have that newer system as well.

They could had added solar panels as a cover and add extra juice .

They do in other countries, which also have solar panels on them.

Most chargers (even in high-traffic areas) sit idle nearly 80% of the time. Even Tesla's highest-traffic Superchargers might only be occupied 40% to 50% of the time. As for power, in Tesla's case, they've put more rated power into the ground at the dispenser side than the site itself actually supports, so when the site is full, almost no one is seeing max power anyway. Most of the public charging providers appear to be right-sized in that the site should be able to be fully occupied while still outputting the max rated power at each dispenser. I still have mixed feelings about which is the better model (chargers more likely to be accessible versus chargers more likely to output full, rated power). Either way, realistically (at least for Tesla), it's probably a net benefit to have at least some portion of their chargers occupied by EVs only charging at 50 to 100 kW, which should free up enough power for everyone else's cars to be able to charge at their max rates.

I have a 7-Eleven with the new 90/180 kW units coming online near me soon, so I'll definitely go check it out soon.

They are listed in the Tesla app where you have to enter your payment information. PlugShare now also lists them when filtering by CCS1 and Tesla as a charging provider.

Absolutely, and not just the Bolt EV. Most non-Tesla EVs have to block multiple stalls in order to hook up. That's why I really don't consider these as anything more than a back up or emergency in the case that there are no public chargers available. V4 should be better, but there aren't a lot of them deployed yet.

Sorry that was unclear. My phone doesn't support wireless charging, so it would have be plugged in if I was using AA. But yes, the 2023 Bolt EUV does have wireless AA.

Thanks, Steve! Yes, the way those stalls are configured, a non-Tesla EV needs to take the right-most stall, otherwise someone will be blocking an additional stall somewhere down the line. As for the ChargePoint Express Plus, I'm a bit disappointed. I actually visited the first one ever installed last year, but that one is at ChargePoint's Headquarters and not open to the public (it's one of the only chargers at their Headquarters that is closed to the public). Outside of that, there are no publicly accessible Express Plus units in California, and the only places I've seen them going in are Colorado and some sections of the East Coast.

@@newscoulomb3705 Production of Chevrolet Bolt EVs to stop by end of 2023 as GM focuses on electric pickups?

​@@shotelco That specific facility is being used for EV trucks, yes, but it appears that GM wants the Chevrolet Equinox EV to replace the Bolt EV/EUV. From their perspective, I can see how the two models fill the same space, though I would like to see them revisit the Bolt line as an entry level hatch.

It's per kWh, so you pay for what you use.

That is not correct. I know several outlets reported that as the reason, but they were making assumptions about the battery design and were wrong in their assessment/conclusion. Yes, the cooling plate is on the bottom of the cells; however, the reason for the charging speed is due to a combination of the CCS1 harness and the cells themselves. The harness is limited to 150 A, and the cells are limited to a 1 C charging speed due to their electrode thickness. Keep in mind, Ultium also has its cooling plate on the bottom, as do a number of other 2+ C charging rate batteries.

Unfortunately, I wasn't able to. My adapter is only 40 A, and I didn't want to risk burning it out pulling 48 kW. Hopefully, I'll get another one of these 11+ kW charging EVs soon, so I can showcase that. But before I do, I need to pick up an 80 A adapter.

V4 stalls will have a 50% longer cord and have the cord attachment on the left side to help out with cars having the left front fender charger port (the most common location for non-Teslas).

You're welcome! It was $0.55 per kWh for non-members. A $13 a month membership drops the price a bit, but it's still more expensive than EA even without a membership.

@@newscoulomb3705 so which one is the best deal: EVgo,EA or ChargePoint?

@@heribertosarmiento1265 Overall, Electrify America is consistently the cheapest. But after memberships, EVgo can come pretty close. ChargePoint is similar to Tesla in pricing, but every now and then, you can find cheap ChargePoint locations.

@@newscoulomb3705 thank you for the info. I sign up for all 3 but haven’t use then since I’m still researching which EV to get since I been driving through the tri state area(NJ,NY,CT) and New England (mostly RI and MA) and gas prices are killing my wallet

It says they are keeping it for bolt and a few others people only ready the click bait and not the actual release from gm.

@@markfitzpatrick6692 yes, and? The bolt isn’t going to be around forever they’re going to uptick and all of those are losing CarPlay/android auto

I wonder what kinda clown show their infotainment software is gonna be like in the upcoming ultium vehicles without CarPlay to use. Software is a big thing now, legacy auto needs to get on that. Most of them can’t even do OTA and a lot of the times those OTA have to be done at a dealership

This is a press car. I still have my 2017.

@@newscoulomb3705 oh ok. I dont understand GM not increasing the DC charging like Hyundai did with the Kona. Doesn’t the Kona peak at 90 now? I believe they use the same batteries too

@@bangbangbowman284 Yes, very similar batteries. I understand why GM didn't push as hard as Hyundai, whose EVs suffer much worse battery fade over time. But the spec sheets for the cells themselves say they are okay to accept more power, and that's why it's a bit disappointing that GM undersized the CCS harness. Realistically, the Bolt EV/EUV should be able to do 10% to 50% in about 20 minutes, which is more than fast enough for most people's expectations.

So all that Tesla fanboy speaking how great the Supercharger network is is all hogwash, because they relied on a proprietary system which worked and only worked with their cars. Now they're "financially forced" to open up their network, Superchargers are no different than EVgo, Electrify America or Chargepoint at the end of the day.

Same here…. The 92 mph top speed, sort of uncomfortable seats and mainly slow charging kept me from buying.

A GM rep has said it could go up to 60KW, haven’t ever see that rate…

​@@MikeRadioNY So you drive at 90 mph? I hope police take you off the road. Very dangerous.

@@thekretch The speed limit is 85 in some locations.

​@@thayne559 Lol, one road in Texass

What region are you traveling in? I often find myself prioritizing other charging providers over EA. It's not that they're necessarily better than EA, but they are often less busy and less of a hassle.

@@newscoulomb3705 going from Ohio to Washington DC. I agree on other providers; I can make the trip using only EVGo and ChargePoint but it’s not as convenient. I have backup plans for my backup plans. Such is road tripping a non Tesla today unfortunately.

It won't let you down. It might be inconvenient at times, but the Bolt will cover 150-200 mile stints at this time of year and if you pick stations with sufficient stalls and/or positive feedback in Plugshare, it will be minimal. Remember that the negative voices ring out far louder than the many EV owners just making successful journeys that are uneventful, beyond a stall switch here and there or a congested location in busy areas. Plan ahead of time for those scenarios and you'll be golden.

@@SteveBirkett There's an old saying: "If people like something they'll tell three or four people....but if they HATE something they'll tell a dozen."

That location is at current $0.46 kWh but might have been $0.45 when that was recorded.

Yes, I think it was about $0.46 per kWh. Not cheap, but the way power rates have been going lately, not terrible either.

@@newscoulomb3705 That's not much more than I pay at home! Glad I can charge at my office for free! Its definitely not bad for public chargers. I think Tesla chargers are about the same.

@@thayne559 To me, a fair rate for public fast charging is between 30 to 40 cents per kWh. Anything less is a great deal, and anything more is expensive. I try to not pay more than 50 cents per kWh if I can help it.

Because it has separate AC and DC pins. Tesla combined their AC and DC pins in the charging socked and added additional hardware to the car's onboard charger in order to switch between the two inputs.

@@newscoulomb3705 Smart plug vs dumb plug.

It's going away. They will eventually adopt the Tesla model.

For CalTrans? If so, that charger has been reported by a number of people for several months. If CalTrans isn't aware of the problem by now, a single phone call won't fix that.

@@newscoulomb3705 Caltrans repaired its charging station near Clear Lake in a few days. The Fresno charging stations were out of service for over a year. Someone took the charging cables. So it varies. I have noticed many free Caltrans charging stations from Madera to the ones off Willow Creek have black circular holes in the screens. I don't understand why some charging stations aren't being repaired quickly. However, squeaky wheel gets the grease. We probably need more people to report problems to Caltrans. Personally, I have encountered more DC charging problems at various EA charging stations. By the way, I got my 23 Bolt EV two months ago. The redesigned seats are definitely more comfortable than the 17, 20, and 21 models. The Bose stereo system sounds better as well. Cheers.

They are talking about fast tracking the update, which means we are probably looking at a BEV2.5 chassis that's compatible with Global B. Beyond that, it's not clear other than that we can expect an Ultium battery and powertrain plus Super Cruise as an option.

I only bring him with me sometimes, and he sheds badly, which I try to avoid with press cars.

Of all the limitations of the Bolt, top speed and horsepower are the least of my concerns. In 18 months of ownership, I have never come close to maxing out my car's 150 kW power maximum, and why anyone would ever need to go over 93 mph in a country where the highest posted speed limits are 80 mph is beyond me. Also, at those speeds, air resistance is so high, driving faster doesn't even save you any time on road trips - whatever time you save on the road, you just pay back by needing to put in more energy at the charging station.

@@ab-tf5fl I'm talking about the Redline edition only. Redline is a buzz word that more often than not refers to speed. Of course no one drives top speed all the time. I've owned my 2013 chevy spark since new and I've only driven it to 100mph twice in 10 years for several seconds. Each time I was on a wide open interstate in the middle of nowhere. Between Pecos, Tx and El Paso. The car is only 84 horsepower. People practically never drive the top speed of there vehicles. Even if they drive a super car. It's just nice to know that their cars can do those high speeds. I'm surprised you didn't know that.

Heh, well, to be fair, only one out of eight that I visited was down. Not great, but still reasonably reliable.

@@newscoulomb3705 Many times when I use EA chargers, I have to move to a different changer. This last trip, I did not have to change chargers, but did have to restart a charge after 10 minutes. This is EA's biggest problem... reliability.

@@mikus4242 I agree that it's definitely one of their top issues. I'm a bit more concerned about sessions that end prematurely or chargers that aren't providing full power without an onscreen warning. If a single charger is down at a site, I'm not that concerned (unless the site is undersized for the demand, which I consider a different issue).

I've heard it's been faster for other non-Tesla EV users, too, so I'm hoping it's just a billing issue. I'll have to check it out with my personal EV soon. I've seen issues where Hyundai Ioniq 5 owners haven't been able to activate either, but now I'm wondering whether they simply didn't give it enough time.

While what you're saying is at least partially true, there are two things to account for. First is, how much faster is the hardware capable of charging? While $80 per car might not seem like a lot, if the difference in peak charging speeds is only 10 to 15 kW under 50%, some still might view it as not being worth the cost. Especially when we consider that, even with 70 kW charging, the Bolt EV would be scoffed at by detractors. Second, there's a HUGE difference between "local driving" and "cannonball running," and "road tripping" falls well within that difference. The Bolt EV, even with slower charging, can travel 300 to 400 miles in the same time someone would typically spend traveling that distance in a gas car, and about half of all drivers will never drive farther than that in a single day. So I would say that the Bolt is simply designed to be a car, but it wasn't designed specifically for high-speed, cannonball running (something GM obviously could have done).

Maybe, but I think it has more to do with using up their stock of existing CCS sockets. Also, GM tends to be fairly conservative with their charging speeds, and they seem to value battery life/longevity over charging speeds.

Yes, but only because they procrastinated so long in upgrading it. This is a change that, at the latest, should have come with the MY 2020 refresh. Again, we're not looking at anything more significant than 10 to 15 minutes saved per DCFC session, but that should have still been an option for some buyers.

It depends on the efficiency of the car. My experience with the Bolt is that, at least with home charging, 32 amps is plenty and, truthfully, I could even charge at 16 amps and barely notice the difference, except on those rare days when I wake up the morning of a trip and realize I forgot to plug the car in. For public charging on trips, faster L2 charging would help - but, only if the charging station is able to handle it, and at least currently, most public charging stations max out at 32 amps, anyway. To date, I've visited exactly one charger where 48 amps would have been nice - the charger went up to 70 amps, and I actually had to plug in for 30 minutes at 32 amps in order to have enough range to reach a DC fast charger further up the road. But, even that site, the benefits of having a 48-amp onboard charger are only temporary - according to PlugShare, there's now a DC fast charger there marked as "coming soon", and once it opens, the car's AC charging limit won't matter anymore. For home charging, 48 amps also starts to get into the range where you have to worry about tripping your main breaker if your air conditioner, clothes dryer, and car charger are all running at the same time, if your home has only 100 amp service, something that home charging at 32 amps has never, ever been an issue for me.

Yes, I didn't break down the exact numbers. I just knew they refer to it as an ~11 kW onboard charger, versus the 19.2 kW being used in the Ultium EVs. I can typically see 10 kW on my 40 A home charger with these units, but that's because it's a true 240 V connection (versus some of the 208 V I've seen) and I believe the Bolt EV/EUV's interface rounds up to the nearest kW.

@@newscoulomb3705 Your video was very informative. Thanks for your reply.

Please enjoy your wait. I'll take those bridging technologies where they exist to avoid other inconveniences.

@@hellsop My point was that vision based technology (some combination of cameras, LiDAR, radar, etc) is superior to one where roads need to be mapped. Teslas system works great for me, so I’m not waiting at all. :)

@@Truav8r What I suspect the mapping IS is an assertion that the road isn't sharing pavement with oncoming traffic and the markings are clear enough that those "visual" systems can work reliably and therefore the road is safe enough to actually use this level of driver assistance on, and allow the accompanying separation of attention. Someone's actually gone out there and looked at the road. Leaving that decision up to the driver looks like its a gaping opportunity for poor choices, and overreliance. (I'll set aside the discussion of whether omitting radar from driver assistance is a good idea for now.)

@@Truav8r You seem to be implying that Super Cruise isn't camera/radar based when it actually is. The only difference is, Super Cruise doesn't try to apply additional logic in order to compensate for a lack of LiDAR mapped roads. Unfortunately, that logic has failed Tesla a number of times over the last few years, resulting in a number of fatalities, and that appears to be way beyond GM's risk appetite. After all, their mission is for "zero crashes," and so far, Super Cruise appears to be holding up to that standard.

It's all relative to battery size and efficiency. In terms of miles per hour of range added, it's as fast or faster than the original Model S, so certainly passable for road trips and travel.

How do you know that GM is losing money on the Bolt? Did they tell you that? If you were in business would you reveal your profits? I don't think so. This is just more disinformation on the internet.

The limitation isn't with the cameras, as far as I know, but the functionality is limited (possibly computer). Either way, though, the statement that GM is losing money on its EVs isn't accurate. Apparently, they are currently one of the few EV automakers that has a four-digit positive margin on each EV they sell, and that doesn't appear to be counting the additional revenue from ZEV credits.

@@newscoulomb3705 GM execs are on record in multiple articles that they are targeting 2025 to be profitable on their EV line. I’d link to one here if it weren’t for RU-vid’s limitation. But it’s widely reported.

@@Truav8r TSLA folk tend to latch onto and share quotes and statements that might not mean what they think they mean. Typically, GM is going to refer to "profitability" in the absence of any additional subsidies (such as ZEV credits). They might also be accounting for the need to offset their current investment in infrastructure and tooling. Either way, considering each Bolt EV sold in a CARB state is worth $19,500 in ZEV credits, it's hard to imagine that GMs EVs aren't already quite profitable.

@@newscoulomb3705 Of course they are accounting for the need to offset investments in tooling and infrastructure. That is how you measure profitability, or lack thereof. When you’re using words like “maybe” and “hard to imagine” in your answer, I’d like to know why you think your answer is any more definitive than mine?? If you think GM isn’t losing their shirt on each $25k or $30k Bolt they sell, you’re dreaming. Tesla has industry leading economies of scale in EVs, and even they aren’t selling a $25k EV yet. When GM is building their own EV powertrains at scale, instead of relying on LG, then they can make a dollar on a $25k EV, but not until then.