GM Volt Forum banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,464 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Someone took a GM representative's comments out of context? You don't say!

Apparently, Bolt EV style cars are a disaster for aerodynamics. I guess that's a bit different than saying the Bolt EV is an aerodynamic disaster.

Link to article.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
20,186 Posts
Yes, in general a boxy CUV like the Bolt EV will have more drag than a low, pointy wedge sedan.

The problem is, apparently there isn't a SAE standard for measuring drag. Different equipment, different wind tunnel, different conditions, different testers, different results. People try to compare one company's results to anther's and it's a waste of time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
766 Posts
I for one am glad GM solved the range problem in the Bolt with battery capacity instead of aerodynamics with the end result being a very usable vehicle for the footprint it takes up. Clearly mainstream customers are voting with their wallets when it comes to vehicle form factor: tall, boxy and space efficient vehicles dominate the mainstream sales charts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,405 Posts
Did anybody who know the history of Chevrolet seriously think the Bolt would be .34 like a Viper?

Come on. It's 2017. GM sells family cars that go 200mph, and cars that go M-F on electricity, but can also drive anywhere where there is no electricity. And an affordable BEV with 100 miles of honest travel radius.

It's the Platinum Age of Automobiles. I'm diggin' it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,431 Posts
I for one am glad GM solved the range problem in the Bolt with battery capacity instead of aerodynamics with the end result being a very usable vehicle for the footprint it takes up. Clearly mainstream customers are voting with their wallets when it comes to vehicle form factor: tall, boxy and space efficient vehicles dominate the mainstream sales charts.
That is very true when you analyze the two best selling GM vehicles: the Chevy Silverado and the Chevy Equinox. Owning a 2009 Chevy Equinox, I can say that I DON"T CARE abou aerodynamics because I never drive above 60 MPH and most of my drives are on city streets and roads which are limited to 40 MPH. But the huge internal cargo capacity allowed me to carry 4 x 8 panels, 10 ft lumber or a 10 foot ladder ALL INSIDE! I am speaking loudly because many buyers ignore this gem in GM's line up and prefer fancy or sporty wheels when the Equinox is 99% practical and spacey (it has the best rear legroom!). It isn't fuel efficient but many at this forum have asked GM to make an EREV Equinox for several years. Then it could be the perfect GM vehicle.

So if the new Chevy Bolt EV is "boxy" and has great cargo capacity for a BEV, then go for it, and don't ming the drag at all. I wish I could see one here and decide if it can replace my Equinox.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,468 Posts
As Talyor swift said, the haters are going hate...if aero was .2, haters would have found something else to throw shade about...Got to learn to ignore both the haters and the cheerleaders...in a 5 star review ignore the 1 and 5 stars...see what the 4s didn't like and the 1s did like...

A lot of people see the relatively high area as a double whammy; they choose this platform (which some think is unattractive) despite it being relatively high in aero...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,405 Posts
Buying a car based on Cd is like buying a car because of the compression ratio.

You want range, efficiency, ergo, room, price, and styling. The actual metrics are not important if the car meets your needs and wants.

4 miles per kWh is the highest efficiency of anything with 200 miles of electric range. So whatever the metrics are that achieved that are not as important as the range you get.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
292 Posts
I think tesla proved that miles per kWh is not as important as range. I personally think that chasing a high m/kWh instead of putting in more battery capacity is hurting ev sales. I drive a lot and at high speeds, the lowest speed limit other than 1/2 mile of residential is 55 on my commute. I also drive hills so battery is important, cd and m/kWh are nice, but the end goal is to get where I need to go and battery size is the best way to increase range. The bolt looks great in that aspect and look forward to sitting in one to see if the seats are as bad as people say.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
As Talyor swift said, the haters are going hate...if aero was .2, haters would have found something else to throw shade about...Got to learn to ignore both the haters and the cheerleaders...in a 5 star review ignore the 1 and 5 stars...see what the 4s didn't like and the 1s did like...

A lot of people see the relatively high area as a double whammy; they choose this platform (which some think is unattractive) despite it being relatively high in aero...
This is old(er), but here's what it took to get this Civic down to Cd of 0.17...extensive body modding. Definitely something there'd be PLENTY of haters on...

http://www.aerocivic.com/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,464 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
I think tesla proved that miles per kWh is not as important as range. I personally think that chasing a high m/kWh instead of putting in more battery capacity is hurting ev sales. I drive a lot and at high speeds, the lowest speed limit other than 1/2 mile of residential is 55 on my commute. I also drive hills so battery is important, cd and m/kWh are nice, but the end goal is to get where I need to go and battery size is the best way to increase range. The bolt looks great in that aspect and look forward to sitting in one to see if the seats are as bad as people say.
So far, the Bolt EV has matched or exceeded my first generation Volt efficiency in all driving conditions, including > 70 mph sustained freeway driving. As for the seats, my recommendation is to sit in both the leather and the cloth. Some aspects of the seats will be firm regardless, but I've heard far fewer complaints about the cloth seats. Even on the Volt, the leather seats seem to be stiffer.

This is old(er), but here's what it took to get this Civic down to Cd of 0.17...extensive body modding. Definitely something there'd be PLENTY of haters on...

http://www.aerocivic.com/
I remember that from the Ecomodder forums. Manufacturers still have a lot of room to improve the aerodynamics of their vehicles. One piece of low-hanging fruit is the side view mirrors. With technology like the Bolt EV's camera rear view mirror, we might see a push for the removal of side view mirrors (replaced with cameras) in the future. That alone would result in a several percentage point improvement of fuel economy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,405 Posts
I think tesla proved that miles per kWh is not as important as range. I personally think that chasing a high m/kWh instead of putting in more battery capacity is hurting ev sales. I drive a lot and at high speeds, the lowest speed limit other than 1/2 mile of residential is 55 on my commute. I also drive hills so battery is important, cd and m/kWh are nice, but the end goal is to get where I need to go and battery size is the best way to increase range. The bolt looks great in that aspect and look forward to sitting in one to see if the seats are as bad as people say.
Miles per kWh has some advantages:

Cost. Less battery to get the same job done.
Weight. The heavier a car is, the more wear on tires and brakes, and the slower handling it has due to rotational inertia.
Volume. You can increase interior size without increasing exterior size.
Electric costs. The better the mi/kWh the lower the power costs.
L2 public charging time. When a public charger is capped at lower amps, you get more range per hour with more mi/Kwh.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
I remember that from the Ecomodder forums. Manufacturers still have a lot of room to improve the aerodynamics of their vehicles. One piece of low-hanging fruit is the side view mirrors. With technology like the Bolt EV's camera rear view mirror, we might see a push for the removal of side view mirrors (replaced with cameras) in the future. That alone would result in a several percentage point improvement of fuel economy.
That, and underbody.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,464 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
That, and underbody.
EVs, for the most part, have addressed that (and the frontal area). The areas that have not been addressed are wheel wells, diffusers, and Kammabacks. Those have been ignored mainly because of design and aesthetics.
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top