I see you answered your own question. The EV-1, which Time called one of the worst 50 cars ever, is revolutionizing driving a dozen years after being pulled from the road.
Thread over, Magiver wins!
Wow, it’s like you’re getting paid to post for Tesla. The EV-1 got good reviews from the people who leased it and wanted to buy it.
Again, and again, and again I ask you, how does a car that hasn’t been built yet revolutionize American driving? You’ve had almost as much time as Tesla takes to build a car to answer the question. Seems to me you’ve spent all your time attacking me because you know you can’t answer.
Since GM never sold any EV1s, GM never was in a position to be in any market, since you need something to sell at a market, which GM never had any product to sell, much less be profitable enterprise.
So anyway I’m still waiting to hear any concrete evidence of this prodigious flood of electric vehicles which will be unleashed upon the earth by all the “big” automakers right this second any time now! according to you, or rather your stinky brown bungholio. Do you actually have any evidence to back up your claim of an impending flood of EVs, or do you just think that your butthole smells like lavender and black ice and we should all just take that as evidence of this tsunami of Bolts or whatever?
What an odd question. “How does a future technology change anything?”
I’m not quite sure how to seriously answer such a question.
But Magiver here is where you lose the argument. COULD GM have revolutionized American driving in the late 1990’s with developing what they started with the EV1? Yes - but they didn’t because they decided to take all of the cars back and crush them. No one is arguing that the EV1 and other BEVs weren’t innovative, they were. But they were not revolutionary. Revolutionary is people going “OMFG I want a Tesla!!!1111ONEONEONEONE”. Revolutionary is people seeing BEVs as a valid car option and not a niche product.
You keep focusing on finances and technology and miss the big picture - will Tesla 3 change how people buy cars viz. looking at BEVs as a serious option when they buy the next car. Technology is one part, management is another (as GM proved when they killed the electric car) and customer perception is the third. You keep avoiding the third part. I WANT a Tesla. I may consider a Bolt if it as good as a Tesla 3. Faraday Future may be bad-ass if it weren’t a conspiracy theorist’s wet dream. But when 2017 how will a FF compare to a Tesla 3?
That is what we are talking about in the thread. If you hold that a car no one has talked about in a decade is the real revolutionary product then that’s great. If you think Bolt will kick Tesla’s ass because GM is big and Tesla is small (and you ignore 1999) then fantastic. If you think that the LEAF is the true trend-setter because in 7 years they have sold 90,000 units then power to ya. All I know is if I have $5000 laying around in March I’m making my deposit on a Model 3.
Because he understands the hypothetical nature of the question. Let me repeat it for you:
IF the Tesla 3 gets 200+ miles on a full charge and
IF it is $35,000
IF deliveries start in 2017
If you want to had more to the hypothetical like
It would have to get 200+ miles in the winter or there need to be a supercharger every 100 miles or something like that feel free but understand that in this thread we are assuming the above assumptions are true.
Yep, that one will earn a warning. You should know better.
Wow, somebody actually posited a thought. Congrats on giving the thread some real thought.
Just for the record, I’m not sure I’d call the EV-1 innovative. Technologically it’s a step back from the incredibly complex ICE cars. To me, the Prius’s power set up was something I’d call innovative. Taking an ice engine and tying it to 2 electric motors through a planetary gear set was if nothing else, clever. The Volt was innovative in that they took a technology that didn’t have the range of a conventional car and extended it indefinitely with an ICE engine. I’m guessing the feedback from the EV-1 and subsequent focus groups told them the majority of drivers didn’t want to give up long range travel.
In steps Tesla. I have to believe they were inspired by the early EV drag racers. These cars were very fast for the money spent on them. They saw a niche to fill and did a phenomenal job filling it. They will force all the sports car makers to compete with them because of the cost/performance ratio. This easily may be their undoing. Their $10,000 option makes their car ridiculously fast for the money.
I’ve talked about money because that’s what it will take to put the Model 3 on the road. And that’s a big part of the thread. If they can’t compete financially with the much larger car companies then the model 3 will not be the car to change people’s driving habits.
I predict a buyout to get the Tesla name and the money from that will go toward their industrial battery business.
Considering this is just the OP rephrased for you for like the 4th time - thanks for the sarcasm.
I think Magiver’s mind would be blown if he went back and read my first post in this thread. After all, I’m just a Telsa fanboy.
So in your opinion the Model 3 will not revolutionize American driving.
And yet, very nearly everything you’ve said in this thread is wrong.
I’ve cited what I discussed.
Like the cites you offered involving supposed pictures of the Model 3, when it is well known that nobody knows what the car looks like, because it isn’t going to be unveiled for several months yet?
Those are the kind of cites that you expect me to take to the bank?
So your rebuttal to my Google-foo of the mythical model 3 proves what exactly? That I’m wrong about it being late to the game?
While you’re pondering that you can look at a video of the GM Bolt that’s being test driven.
Why don’t you just admit that the reason you can’t come up with a good argument as to why the Model 3 will revolutionize American driving is because it’s all bark and no dog at the moment. Even your rebuttals support my argument that it’s behind schedule.
I’m pretty impressed with what they’ve done. But I’m also amused at how many design elements they’ve borrowed from Tesla. Specifically, the:
- flush-mounted door handles
- panoramic roof
- general shape of the seats, with sloping “shoulders” (compare to the Model X, vs. for instance the Volt)
- lightweight seat mounting (kinda like airplane seats)
- minimalistic center console
- prominent “nosecone” vs. large open grille
To be clear, I applaud Chevy for looking at Tesla for design cues. And I don’t think it means the Bolt is a Tesla knockoff. But it would be utterly ludicrous to suggest that the Bolt would look anything like it does if it weren’t for Tesla getting there first.
You think the Boltlooks like a Tesla Model X?
The Bolt looks more like a Leaf than a Model X.
about the only thing on your list is the seat suspension and as you pointed out that’s an aviation design to save weight. Flush door handles have been around at least since the Chevy Corvette and a lack of grill goes back to the Studebaker Avanti. But since grills are used to get air into radiators there isn’t much use for them on an EV and they cost money.
To me the Bolt has a utilitarian look like a Prius. I expect the Model 3 to have a sportier look like a Mazda Speed 3. It needs to fit in with their image.
FTR I’d have a lot of trouble with the headrests going forward on both the cars. And by a lot of trouble I mean I couldn’t drive the car. I hope they’re adjustable.
No, I said they borrowed many design elements, and specifically said that it is not a Tesla knockoff.
If it were just one element, I could write it off to coincidence, convergent evolution, or previous examples. But there are too many to write all of them off that way. Tesla has started a new design language, one which is more appropriate for electric cars, and the Bolt is taking cues from that. It’s still clearly a Chevy but I think we’ll see a new generation of cars which share elements with Tesla.
As for the details:
- It’s not just the fact that the handles are flush, but rather the almost seamless-looking shiny rectangle look. Maybe someone else still did it first, but Tesla is quite distinctive today for that look.
- It’s the lack of prominent grille and the nosecone look that the Bolt shares with Tesla. The Avanti doesn’t look at all similar. Sure, the Bolt is more squashed looking, but that’s a function of the overall shape.
Personally, I don’t think it looks like a Leaf at all. The only shared element I see is the very short hood (it wouldn’t surprise me if the Model 3 also has a short front). I could see myself driving a Bolt; I wouldn’t be caught dead in a Leaf. But I am hoping the Model 3 looks sportier yet, as you say.
I’d like to see the internal mechanical layout as well. I suspect the Bolt shares even deeper design similarities with Tesla. The completely flat floor is a clue, for one.
Since you keep insisting that the Bolt is the shiznit and all that, can you actually produce some solid evidence that it is going to be produced in mass quantities. Can you back up your asssertions that you spew in this thread? Again I would looooove to see any evidence whatsoever of what you are claiming will happen, what with this ginormous wave of mass produced electric vehicles produced by GM.
Can you actually provide any evidence of this claim that you have?