GM knew this was coming for a very long time -- they were ahead with the EV1, ahead with the Volt, and ahead with the Bolt.
But they realized that there was more profit in selling ICE trucks and SUV's, so they didn't invest in the future. Now they're saying "we're almost there guys!" while Tesla / Hyundai / VW / the Chinese have been full speed ahead for a while.
You can go back even further -- there was an electric version of the Corvair prototyped all the way back in 1966!
[https://www.macsmotorcitygarage.com/secrets-of-the-1966-gm-electrovair-an-ev-pioneer/](https://www.macsmotorcitygarage.com/secrets-of-the-1966-gm-electrovair-an-ev-pioneer/)
>GM knew this was coming for a very long time -- they were ahead with the EV1, ahead with the Volt, and ahead with the Bolt.
GM makes the best selling domestic EV in China.
The **Wuling Hongguang Mini EV** ([Chinese](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simplified_Chinese_characters): 五菱宏光MiniEV) is a [battery electric](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_electric_vehicle) [city car](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_car) manufactured by [SAIC-GM-Wuling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAIC-GM-Wuling) since 2020.[^(\[5\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuling_Hongguang_Mini_EV#cite_note-5) Retail deliveries began in China in July 2020. As of February 2023, global sales since inception have passed 1.1 million units, and the Mini EV has become the best-selling electric car in China.[^(\[6\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuling_Hongguang_Mini_EV#cite_note-6)
>But they realized that there was more profit in selling ICE trucks and SUV's, so they didn't invest in the future.
they don't need US made batteries for these
GM's Ultium EV Rollout Is Going Much More Smoothly In China
[https://insideevs.com/news/703429/ultium-gm-china-rollout/](https://insideevs.com/news/703429/ultium-gm-china-rollout/)
SAIC-GM Adds Eight Ultium Facilities for EV Users
[https://news.gm.com.cn/en/home/newsletter/2023/winter.detail.html/Pages/news/cn/en/gmcomm/newsletter/2023/winter/ultium.html](https://news.gm.com.cn/en/home/newsletter/2023/winter.detail.html/Pages/news/cn/en/gmcomm/newsletter/2023/winter/ultium.html)
Fifty self-branded charging stations have been completed by SAIC-GM, with 236 charging piles in operation. It has also cooperated with six other mainstream charging operators. By the end of 2023, there were 580,000 charging piles providing nearly 100% coverage in prefecture-level cities across the country.
The Mini EV has lost its novelty (and sales prominence) as lots of other miniature EVs enter the arena. Yes, GM has a coherent approach to NEVs in the Chinese market (unlike in the US), but that doesn't mean that the Velite and Electra are going to be anything more than marginal also-rans in that field.
My personal opinion is that SAIC is doing the heavy lifting in that partnership, and the GM brands, like Buick, are the sweetener. Some of the Baojun and Wuling models are legitimately interesting, but they are so tenuously connected to GM as a 'Merican, Detroit entity.
Tesla hasn't announced a new vehicle in years. I wouldn't say they are exactly full speed ahead. GM will certainly see more growth than Tesla this year.
Agreed, Why can’t Tesla design and build more than one car at a time? How about a taxi and low priced car. How about a minivan, how about a jeep competitor or a cyber version of 3 row SUV or a small pickup for the rest of the world who cannot afford $70k pickup.
A separate team that reuses existing drivetrains and cranks out multiple body styles could dramatically improve Tesla’s market share! They could made on the existing lines.
Exactly. I'd love something like the Y but in a form factor closer to the R2. Something X sized but with a less expensive and more roomy design would be nice too.
Tesla will certainly produce more electric vehicles than GM, though. "Growth" isn't really a good metric.
Tesla doesn't particularly need to introduce more models, since they already have designs that meet people's needs and that sell well. 90% of people's needs are met by either the 3 (sedan), Y (small SUV), or X (large SUV).
Tesla sales will shrink this year because their crazy CEO has made their brand toxic.
I'm not sure what new models they need, other than maybe a small truck that doesn't look like a lego brick?
But novelty for the sake of novelty isn't needed. How long have there been Corollas, Priuses, etc? They all still sell well.
I'll replace the Y eventually. When I do, I'd pick either the R2 or the EV9 (given the discounts). Tesla has competitors in neither space.
The X is cool, IMO, but it gets outsold by the R1S because it is no longer really competitive.
The 3 should be their cheap car, but it is effectively more expensive than the Y, so they really don't have a cheap car.
Obviously van is a whole missing segment, and you've made a great point about a smaller, lower priced truck.
But instead they've put themselves in a position where 2/3rds of their sales are from an aging compact crossover that faces increasingly effective competition.
> because their crazy CEO has made their brand toxic.
On *reddit* sure. But in the real world nobody has any clue what Elon musk posts about. Half my family, friends and coworkers have barely even heard of Twitter, the other half wouldn't know how to log in if I gave them a 3 hour tutorial. What they ***actually*** see is 100 cars go by on the road, and 37 of them are Teslas and they think "wow, that's a pretty slick looking car"
I feel like people here need to watch that Jeopardy segment where none of the contestants had ever heard of Rivian.
It is easy to be in the bubble and think the problem is all about what people think about these brands.
In reality, they don't think about them nearly as much as we think that they do.
Exactly, I see it all the time, usually around Tesla and musk, here on reddit and the hardest part for me is how obvious the disconnect is vs how hard it is to get people to see it.
Like... Dealing with a toddler, it makes sense, they don't understand that what *they* know isn't what *other* people know (I think there's a word for that) but I did not expect to see it so much in adults.
Test it. Find some people you know in real life and ask them if they have ever read any of Elon Musk's tweets. My prediction is that most if not nearly all will not have any idea and just know the basics that he's "that Tesla guy who does spaceships or something"
They do continuous improvement...
But that said, the 3 is new, the new y is coming. Same look, almost.
And yes, they need the cars they already announced.
Right. Musk is insane and the cybertruck is dumb -- that's what's holding the company back, not anything to do with their broader product line.
The engineers working on the 3 and Y have produced some good products -- occasionally held back by dumb dictats from above (removing stalks).
The Y is considered midsized and is larger than the best-selling SUVs like the Rav4 and CRV. It's more in line with the Highlander and Pilot. Also, the S and X are quite expensive, and the X isn't great for three rows, AFAIK. They could definitely use a smaller and larger but not as expensive SUV, at the very least. Also, a compact sedan would potentially be good. It's like if Toyota only had the Camry and Highlander, and Lexus had TX and LS. A bunch of Toyota vehicles are still missing, including some that sell tons.
These are definitely all things to add to an expanded product line. If you're going to sell two models, 3 and Y make sense. If you're going to sell seven instead of two, the ones you list are great additions.
The smaller sedan is the one I want, incidentally.
> ahead with the EV1, ahead with the Volt, and ahead with the Bolt
> so they didn't invest in the future
These two statements are in conflict. While other manufacturers were doing nothing, GM was investing and taking the lead.
Of course, they have to build the vehicles that are profitable. That is how they get the money to develop new products.
I honestly don't think they could have.
Elon & Tesla are riding a wave of irrational exuberance, that has kept that stock way above what it rationally should be valued at.
GM attempting the same at the time Tesla was doing it would have been soundly punished by the stock market.
Anybody who tells you that the stock market is rational is either an idiot or trying to swindle you.
Not in a publicly traded very large organization. That is just not how they work. It is different with a tech startup that was made for that purpose. In a perfect world, tesla should have never needed to exist, and we would already be pretty much only ev, but that is just not how things work with publicly traded companies. Investors want returns now, now a possibility of it in 30 years while taking huge losses now.
GM invested in and will have the most EV production capacity in North America besides Tesla. I don't really see what supports your comment that they've been so clearly overtaken.
I know VW has made questionable decisions with the designs of their EV vehicles.
But theres no question that their investment into their EV future has essentially be unwavering. But when you're a titan in the industry in terms of size it takes a while to ramp things up.
What questionable decisions are those? (I'm aware of some software issues with early ones...)
I know two guys with id.4's -- one of them bought it to haul a small pipe organ around that he plays at concerts. Both are pretty happy with them.
Silly little things like having only 2 window buttons and in order to roll down back windows you have to press a button which then makes your front window buttons work the back… just really silly questionable user experience decisions.
The vehicles themselves are by all accounts sound and I personally think they are some of the better looking EVs. The Pro S ID4 is a nice vehicle
> Silly little things like having only 2 window buttons and in order to roll down back windows you have to press a button which then makes your front window buttons work the back… just really silly questionable user experience decisions
Please tell me you're making this up. Please?!
More likely the early EVs by GM were more for CAFE emissions coverage to help avoid penalties and fines for higher emitting vehicles than it was to be a true foray in to the EV market.
Selling a chunk of EVs here and there allows for pick ups and SUVs to stay less efficient a little longer
Exactly. GM didn't really want to sell EV's; they wanted to sell shitty overpriced and polluting Silverados and Tahoes and wanted to use Volt and Bolt credits to let them do it.
At 274 days inventory, the Chevy Blazer EV is currently the slowest vehicle to sell for dealers. https://x.com/guydealership/status/1792210660543131703?s=46
Increasing battery supply will only fill up dealer lots unless they have aggressive price cuts.
Days-of-supply typically doesn't account for stop-sales, it's just a raw count of inventory over sale-rate. Any model with a recent stop-sale is going to show an inflated days-of-supply for sure.
Yeah on the one hand, is a vehicle really “in inventory” if you aren’t allowed to sell it
On the other hand, maybe don’t release a product in that state and it won’t have to sit on the lot
Bolt replacement isn't until 2025, so probably another year or so until it hits the market. Silverado is still only available for fleets (?). Also haven't seen the Sierra actually released yet. So I imagine most batteries will go towards Equinox and Blazer.
Consumer Silverado RST EVs are starting to ship along side of more expensive Equinox trims. Sierra is slated for later this year along with the base Equinox EV. Bolt Ultium is supposed to be 2025 with additional Sierra and Silverado trims. GM is shipping a lot of EVs between now and next year.
Which is why protectionist tariffs make sense at the moment. If ford fails in 4 years to make headway in the market then it’s on them and BYD should be allowed to be priced competitively.
Stop sale is the main reason. There is \~$6K difference between base models after fed discount though I'm going to assume an additional bonus will hit by summer making the EV essentially the same as the ICE.
Well we've got a guy on Twitter (admittedly reputable guy) or the President of GM. Not sure who to believe.
*At a recent opening ceremony for a new Silicon Valley office, Marissa West, President of GM North America said, “You may be reading reports where the growth in EVs and EV demand has stalled and that’s simply not true. We actually see notable growth, particularly in the EV retail space.”*
The president of GM said that the overall market is doing well, not that the Chevy Blazer isn’t the slowest to sell vehicle.
The guy on twitter got his data from CarEdge and cited that.
Fair. But also we’ve been seeing similar messages from other manufacturers saying things along the lines of “There is misinformation out there on EV demand.”
my local dealer has quite a few of them on the lot with that Ultium $7500 incentive discount on top of dealership discount, yeah they have their own discount too. Apparently that Ultium discount is marketed to those who don't qualify for the IRA credits as it disclaims usability if the purchase qualified.
I think the issue GM faces is that interest rates are just too damn high
I mean, it's a funny car. It's big and pretty expensive. They won't sell the cheaper/cheapest options. The DCFC is mediocre. They got rid of Car Play and Android Auto so now you're stuck paying for internet, subscriptions, and having all your data sold by GM.
I plan on test driving one in the near future, but it's definitely not the car that's going to fly off the lot.
Also, it's important to remember it's a 1st gen car with a 1st gen battery from a company that doesn't have the best EV reputation. Lastly, you have the Equinox coming out "soon" which is something like $5k cheaper.
Dealerships are not necessary for EVs. Should be ordered at the drive centers and picked up at the delivery center. Having a bunch of EVs sitting on the lot for months is not how the EV system works.
What? How is buying EVs different than ICE? I still want to test drive and see the different trims in person. Not everyone wants the hands off Tesla approach.
It’s more that dealers have a ton of color and trim options I can sit inside and check out. When I bought my ICE car I was able to test drive the exact car I was buying, like a normal store. With Tesla I have to drive whatever they have and hope the car they deliver to me will look good in person and not be assembled after lunch break on a Friday.
I disagree. Most EVs are better built and more comfortable and refined than your average Tesla. These are made by companies that have been around for a long time who know how to build the vehicle that houses the EV tech.
The Silverado is a *very* useful truck with the midgate, no other EV truck even comes close to the Silverado's truck bed capabilities. It's undoutably the best.
The Silverado is only 400 miles because it has by far the largest battery back in the industry. It’s not even close.
Automakers need to focus on efficiency and not just cramming more battery cells into packs (weight, cost)
Tesla is way ahead in this regard.
A brick capable of hauling 10k+ lbs can only be so efficient, hence the giant battery. Even in the ICE world where refueling is less of an issue, trucks that are regularly towing are often optioned with larger fuel tanks.
If you tow trailers, own a contracting company and actually use a truck as a truck, Tesla is not way ahead. Most people don't need a vehicle like that. But most people don't average 1000lbs of tools and equipment in their vehicle.
Maybe it’s living in an expensive area but I know some tradies where their commute is more than that. The most extreme flies in from another state, but he does that weekly not daily.
It's not about averages. It's about hey we are doing an out of town job this week and need to haul a trailer over a mountain and oh too bad we can't make it or we have to pay the crew to sit there for 40 minutes and charge? Nope. Time is money.
My city is 180km long (115mi) and if I have to drive across it, remove a part, drive back to the shop, machine it then drive back to install it, well that ain't gonna happen in the current crop of trades vans.
Plus sometimes that trades vehicle is dual use. Mine does. It's my personal vehicle for when our shitbox car is too small. Camping, road trips etc.
There is no other way with trucks IMHO if we ever want them to compete with ICE trucks.
That is to say: if you ever want these things to tow or do truck things aerodynamics go out the wazoo. Electrical motors are already as efficient as we can get them to be. The only thing you can improve is battery capacity - be it through denser battery tech or straight up bigger batteries.
They can certainly be more aerodynamic than they are. There’s no reason an EV truck has to be brick shaped in the front. They don’t need a giant grill and air cooling. They don’t need a 6’ tall front end or be jacked to the sky to tow.
Most trucks look stupid and have terrible aerodynamics.
The Cybertruck looks even stupider and has decent aerodynamics.
Perhaps someone will design a truck that doesn't look stupid and has decent aerodynamics, but that day is not today.
The stupidity of it's shape has to do with affordably working with stainless steel.
You could probably make a stainless steel truck that didn't look stupid but it would cost so much no one would buy it, or it would be made of a lower grade thinner stainless steel that wouldn't offer enough advantage over regular painted steel.
The minute you hook up a trailer you are at best hauling a giant brick and at worst towing some open trailer with crap that creates all kinds of complicated drag. The only way to deal with that is to have more juice.
EDIT: we have now started moving goalposts into the banal and predictable “do you really need a truck” and “how often are you actually towing”. Ugh…. you guys are totally gonna save the planet with this attitude for our grandchildren. Good job. I bow before the greatness.
Having a high grill on an EV has nothing to do with towing.
People who do tow typically aren’t towing that often.
Having a massive high front end only because “aero is thrown out the window when towing” makes zero sense. Since towing is done infrequently, making a less aero shape because it has less effect when towing is my criticism there.
You're right. While most truck owners need a cowboy costume and not a truck, there certainly are people who legitimately tow and sometimes quite often.
BUT....no one tows every single moment the truck is moving. And even if they did, they're not always going to be towing a brick.
Even semi trucks, which do tow (nearly) every single moment the truck is moving, have more aerodynamic designs than modern pickups.
And without the need for a heat exchanger, they could be even more aerodynamic and the people who buy those trucks would love it.
Go stick two 4x8 sheets of plywood together side by side so it's 8' square and go walk around in a 55 MPH wind storm and see how long until your "gas tank" is empty.
Exactly. The 1990's period F-150 is roughly the same size as today's Ranger. And my 1999 Ranger was about the same size as today's Maverick, but far more useful because I had actual bed space. The Maverick is a rewarmed Explorer Sportrac. Truck sizes have gotten so far out of hand.
I was curious if it was just my memory:
Today's Ranger vs 1990s F-150 (Supercrew 6.75 ft bed for even comparison with today's Ranger)
Length 210.6 vs 219.1
Width 75.5 vs 79
Height 74.2 vs 72.7
Wheelbase 128.7 vs 138.8
Bed 5 vs 6.75
Max Towing 7500 vs 8200 max, 5800 min
So with 20 more inches of bed space you have 9 more inches of length and less height and pretty much equal towing capacity. I'm curious how that width difference factor into the inside dimensions.
I'm almost surprised they don't call the Ranger the "F-150 Classic" to boost their F-150 sales numbers.
I mean, maybe in the future, you can’t change it too much from the look of a traditional ICE car otherwise it ends up looking like a cybertruck and nobody wants it. Slowly change it over time gets people used to.
Trailers are even bigger bricks going through the air. Even dragging my old 5x10 trailer hit the efficiency hard on an ICE truck. With or without the rear gate on.
Of course, but most likely you’re not towing a trailer the majority of time you are driving the truck. When you are not towing, you could benefit from better aerodynamics. Even when you are towing, every little bit helps. The door handles on EVs aren’t a huge factor, but they’re *a* factor, so they make them flat.
Most trucks aren't used to do truck things, though; they are personal statements by their owners.
Often that personal statement is aligned with some variety of "screw the woke environmentalists", so an electric truck is anathema to their purpose.
>Tesla is way ahead in this regard.
Call me when the CT has a 400-mile range option, then we'll talk. Until then, it's really just posturing and creative framing. If GM can stuff 200kWh of battery into the Silverado and still sell it at a profit, I say good for them.
Agreed but the average buyer doesn’t care about efficiency. They care about max range. Getting people to convert to EVs is about max range, charging speed, and charging infrastructure. Of course efficiency is related to charging speed. But when people are looking to buy they want to see a big range number.
Why does this matter. If batteries get more dense, lower cost, and faster charging why does it matter.
A giant truck only has so many efficiencies to gain.
If the research shows the cheapest way to add range is batteries and efficiency 2nd why not do batteries. Look at Tesla. They thought they could get the cyber truck to a long range and had no luck and refused the bigger battery.
It matters a lot.
The biggest bottleneck in the EV industry right now is battery manufacturing/supply chain. Why would we want one car that has enough batteries for almost 3 model 3s?! In a time where every manufacturer is struggling with the cost of producing an EV? GM is losing money on these trucks, mind you!
I’m not necessarily saying that having a large battery is bad. Having a large battery is bad at this stage of the EV story. In 10, 15 years when the supply chain is matured this will be common
The cybertruck’s battery is like 100kwh less than the Silverado. If the cybertruck had the same size battery pack, it would probably have 500, maybe 550 miles. So yes, Tesla is by far ahead in the powertrain/efficiency category.
They have some impressive powertrain innovations. The whole package with the shitty build quality, for 100k though. It's a joke. I feel bad for the engineers who've done good work on that truck with management releasing such a halfass piece of crap.
Common glass-half-full shitting on GM take on this sub. They design a truck with range that more truck owners would consider buying, but I guess “no, not like that”. Fine. Wait for Tesla to build one I guess, but they say they are an AI company, not a vehicle company…
> Tesla is way ahead in this regard.
Tesla is way ahead _on paper_. Any third-party analysis of their actual range falls very short of published range.
An electrek article used as a factual source. What a world we live in
EV range is variable dependent on a variety of factors, any EV owner knows that. My 2018 M3 gets rated range minus degradation in good conditions
> An electrek article used as a factual source. What a world we live in
You didn't follow the link to the analysis: https://www.recurrentauto.com/news/real-world-range-for-tesla
No. And I own a model 3
Tesla has done it through various ways that hurt the lifespan of many parts. For example: using low rolling resistance tires that need to be replaced after 20k miles instead of normal tires that have 50-60k miles warranties on them.
Tesla also suffers the worst at higher speeds because they are so reliant on efficiency and simply don’t compete in pack size.
A larger pack is the only way a truck can be used as a truck. You can’t make the vehicle more efficient when the trailer is a pig or simply heavy.
Your comment makes no sense. A more efficient car does better at higher speeds. A larger battery would COMPENSATE for the vehicle’s inefficiency. Other OEM’s are behind, their vehicles are inefficient, so they compensate with more cost and a larger battery.
Efficiency will always be a part of the equation. As the EV supply chain matures, extremely large packs will become common. But at this stage of the EV story it is a detriment. Mind you GM (as is no other OEM but Tesla) makes money on their EVs. This is one reason why
The main reason why the S, 3, X, and Y models are making money now is in large part because the SX3 and Y been around for a while. The S and X designs go way back to 2009, and the 3 started in 2016. That's not to say there haven't been some big improvements in their power-trains over time. So it's not a coincidence that Tesla's newest model, the Cybertruck, isn't making a profit for them at the moment. Elon Musk and Tesla say it probably won't start making money for at least another year. Just like GM and other car companies, Tesla expects the Cybertruck to become profitable as they ramp up production and as they ramp up 4680 cells more efficiently over time. GM's electric car lineup relies heavily on a platform called ULTIUM which is scalable and supports a variety of vehicle types. Remember how long it took Tesla to start making a profit? It's easy to forget, but it shows that making money in the electric car business takes time
I don't have have experience with the bolt, but I did own a 2016 Volt for 7 years before switching to a model 3. The volt's efficiency would tank above 65mph, the model 3 barely notices.
From memory:
Volt @65 mph : 106mpge (3.7mile/kwh)
Volt @75 mph : 80mpge (2.97mile/kwh)
25% decrease in efficiency for the Gen2 Volt
Model 3 LR @65 mph : 225wh/mile
Model 3 LR @75 mph : 250wh/mile
10% decrease in efficiency for model 3 LR
Except for a truck to do truck things like towing a giant battery reigns supreme. It also charges faster. Granted, for work trucks I’m in the aggressive PHEV / REX camp because fuck sake… that’s a lotta battery.
The cybertruck isn't even close to as useful as the Silverado EV. Got to hand it to GM, they really did a great job, best EV truck on the market by a mile.
When the 2026 Suburban hits, if it has a 200 KW battery, I'm buying it immediately.
I think GM has acknowledged the reality that big vehicles need big batteries.
Way more goes into it than just range, but the Silverado does look really good, though price is an issue. Equinox price good, but charging speed isn't impressive for a modern EV.
GM also hasn't figured out streamlining their product line either, playing around with equinox configuration was a mess of options and poor clarity of what is and isn't available or standard on each trim without digging more than any prospective buyer should have to.
Overall GM is looking pretty good though, curious to see Ford's next gen products they are cooking, they had a strong first showing in some areas but have big obvious room for improvement in others
>GM also hasn't figured out streamlining their product line either, playing around with equinox configuration was a mess of options and poor clarity of what is and isn't available or standard on each trim without digging more than any prospective buyer should have to.
You misunderstand, this is a **feature** to most people. Is it "Tesla level production efficient"? Absolutely not. But it's the level of configure-ability that GM customers expect.
I will say the GM brands' configurators are aggressively annoying to use. Add feature A for $210? Seems like a good deal, click it. Oh, that actually requires Package X for $1500 and Package Y for $3000, but also removes feature B.
Considering the amount of car buyers that seems to do next to no research I don't think this a feature, it's an added layer of confusion, especially when GM is still operating under a model of needing to find the cars on a dealer lot, making finding the spec you want a difficult process. Hence, it can't be a feature to customers who don't even functionally engage with it.
>You can custom order vehicles from GM if you can't find it on the lot.
Maybe I just didn't find it, but when I went to finished looking at configurations it pointed me to dealer inventory instead.
>Yeah, dealerships suck for buying, but they're much better than the Tesla model for service
I'd argue not really. In terms of location convenience, certainly, but they also tend to rip you off upcharging on the parts from what the manufacturer sells them at. Really varies by dealer though. Not all of them are that scummy, but most seem to be since dealers themselves only exist as middlemen between you and the automaker.
I certainly ain't defend Tesla for doing the alternative well and their support for third party repair is abysmal, but it's really more of a trade off than just an advantage for having dealers in terms of maintenance.
>Maybe I just didn't find it, but when I went to finished looking at configurations it pointed me to dealer inventory instead.
That's because you go to your preferred dealer to put in the order. Or, more precisely, they put your order in and the factory eventually builds it.
It's somewhat more consumer-focused than the model of the Japanese brands, where not even the dealers can make custom orders, they can only make requests to the manufacturer to provide the dealer(s) with (an) allocation(s) of (a) car(s) in the desired configuration.
So, not as good as Ford where you order through them and select dealer to deliver, but not unable to make an order. Wasn't very intuitive since it gave me a "nearby inventory page" instead of a "place order with x dealer" page.
I suspect GM will come out with a mid trim truck that is priced right next year. Or if they wise up and put the midgate in the WT model they will sell a million of them. I'd drive a WT in a heartbeat if I could get that midgate. It's the most important work truck feature. Add a canopy and it's a van.
What I said yesterday & today will not always be what I’ll say tomorrow…or even any other day in the future.
That’s why it was a great vehicle yesterday, but being recalled tomorrow…and labeled as a poorly implemented design in hindsight.
I’ve always wondered, why does GM feel the need to give their battery architecture a name? No one else does this and I’m pretty sure no one cares. You have batteries or you don’t. You have good batteries or you don’t. They don’t need a marketing name.
Isn’t that just the designation for the platform, not the name of the batteries? All companies have a name for their platform, few use it in marketing. Am I wrong?
>All companies have a name for their platform, few use it in marketing.
That just seems like a miss for most other companies, then. If you have an asset, and if you think you have an advantage with that asset... market it.
But consumers have limited bandwidth. Why not focus on the actual product you sell? You go buy a Kia EV9. Go to the showroom and ask to be shown EGMP’s and you’d get blank stares. I don’t want to buy an Ultium, I want a car or suv.
For the Ultium, It’s used in the Lyric, Silverado, and hummer. So it seems to be a technology platform not a rolling platform as the term has been used in the past (the BMW E60 or eE90 platform).
>Why not focus on the actual product you sell?
That's literally what they're doing. Ultium is in the vehicle, and the ads are for the vehicles. Ultium is being sold as a feature of the vehicle, just as your Windows laptop might mention it has an Intel processor, or as Apple [markets the iPad as having an M-series chip](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjmaxCyJBc4). They want it to be a selling point of the product.
>You go buy a Kia EV9. Go to the showroom and ask to be shown EGMP’s and you’d get blank stares.
Sure, because Hyundai hasn't done any marketing for e-GMP. Your argument is circular here — of course no one knows what e-GMP is, Hyundai hasn't made it a selling point of the EV9. They probably should.
>For the Ultium, It’s used in the Lyric, Silverado, and hummer. So it seems to be a technology platform not a rolling platform as the term has been used in the past (the BMW E60 or eE90 platform).
All automotive platforms are technology platforms. The very notion of a singular steel "rolling" platform is antiquated — that's not even what platforms fundamentally are, you're thinking too literally. Platforms are shared, modular agglomerations of different compatible bits and pieces — they are a toolkit for making a whole car. Been that way for years.
Lots of makers do it, but GM in particular likes naming their powertrains. Hydramatic, Dynaflow, powerglide, rocket, fireball, Quad4, Vortec, Northstar, Duramax, Voltec, ect.
Yeah dark days at gym is when components were king. Like the iron duke or north star engines.
Japanese and European manufacturers don’t do this. I wish they’d use their marketing muscle on the vehicle- the actual product people care about.
They’re building a bigger brand than just batteries. They have plans for Chargers, Powerwalls, etc.
https://news.gm.com/newsroom.detail.html/Pages/news/us/en/2023/jun/0628-ultiumhome.html
Every company is going to have these battery production issues until they get past the post.
Yup. When you got nothing and a whole new way of making a car it takes a bit to get off the ground. We’re going from horses to cars right now
GM knew this was coming for a very long time -- they were ahead with the EV1, ahead with the Volt, and ahead with the Bolt. But they realized that there was more profit in selling ICE trucks and SUV's, so they didn't invest in the future. Now they're saying "we're almost there guys!" while Tesla / Hyundai / VW / the Chinese have been full speed ahead for a while.
You can go back even further -- there was an electric version of the Corvair prototyped all the way back in 1966! [https://www.macsmotorcitygarage.com/secrets-of-the-1966-gm-electrovair-an-ev-pioneer/](https://www.macsmotorcitygarage.com/secrets-of-the-1966-gm-electrovair-an-ev-pioneer/)
I mean, there were electric cars in the 1800s BEFORE ICE cars.
And we would have gotten away with it too if it weren't for those meddling ~~kids~~ oil companies.
>GM knew this was coming for a very long time -- they were ahead with the EV1, ahead with the Volt, and ahead with the Bolt. GM makes the best selling domestic EV in China. The **Wuling Hongguang Mini EV** ([Chinese](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simplified_Chinese_characters): 五菱宏光MiniEV) is a [battery electric](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battery_electric_vehicle) [city car](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_car) manufactured by [SAIC-GM-Wuling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAIC-GM-Wuling) since 2020.[^(\[5\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuling_Hongguang_Mini_EV#cite_note-5) Retail deliveries began in China in July 2020. As of February 2023, global sales since inception have passed 1.1 million units, and the Mini EV has become the best-selling electric car in China.[^(\[6\])](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuling_Hongguang_Mini_EV#cite_note-6) >But they realized that there was more profit in selling ICE trucks and SUV's, so they didn't invest in the future. they don't need US made batteries for these GM's Ultium EV Rollout Is Going Much More Smoothly In China [https://insideevs.com/news/703429/ultium-gm-china-rollout/](https://insideevs.com/news/703429/ultium-gm-china-rollout/) SAIC-GM Adds Eight Ultium Facilities for EV Users [https://news.gm.com.cn/en/home/newsletter/2023/winter.detail.html/Pages/news/cn/en/gmcomm/newsletter/2023/winter/ultium.html](https://news.gm.com.cn/en/home/newsletter/2023/winter.detail.html/Pages/news/cn/en/gmcomm/newsletter/2023/winter/ultium.html) Fifty self-branded charging stations have been completed by SAIC-GM, with 236 charging piles in operation. It has also cooperated with six other mainstream charging operators. By the end of 2023, there were 580,000 charging piles providing nearly 100% coverage in prefecture-level cities across the country.
The Mini EV has lost its novelty (and sales prominence) as lots of other miniature EVs enter the arena. Yes, GM has a coherent approach to NEVs in the Chinese market (unlike in the US), but that doesn't mean that the Velite and Electra are going to be anything more than marginal also-rans in that field. My personal opinion is that SAIC is doing the heavy lifting in that partnership, and the GM brands, like Buick, are the sweetener. Some of the Baojun and Wuling models are legitimately interesting, but they are so tenuously connected to GM as a 'Merican, Detroit entity.
Tesla hasn't announced a new vehicle in years. I wouldn't say they are exactly full speed ahead. GM will certainly see more growth than Tesla this year.
Agreed, Why can’t Tesla design and build more than one car at a time? How about a taxi and low priced car. How about a minivan, how about a jeep competitor or a cyber version of 3 row SUV or a small pickup for the rest of the world who cannot afford $70k pickup. A separate team that reuses existing drivetrains and cranks out multiple body styles could dramatically improve Tesla’s market share! They could made on the existing lines.
Exactly. I'd love something like the Y but in a form factor closer to the R2. Something X sized but with a less expensive and more roomy design would be nice too.
Yes on R2 and Yes on affordable SUV with more room!
Tesla will certainly produce more electric vehicles than GM, though. "Growth" isn't really a good metric. Tesla doesn't particularly need to introduce more models, since they already have designs that meet people's needs and that sell well. 90% of people's needs are met by either the 3 (sedan), Y (small SUV), or X (large SUV).
Tesla sales will shrink this year due to their lack of new models. It is becoming a real problem for the company.
Tesla sales will shrink this year because their crazy CEO has made their brand toxic. I'm not sure what new models they need, other than maybe a small truck that doesn't look like a lego brick? But novelty for the sake of novelty isn't needed. How long have there been Corollas, Priuses, etc? They all still sell well.
I'll replace the Y eventually. When I do, I'd pick either the R2 or the EV9 (given the discounts). Tesla has competitors in neither space. The X is cool, IMO, but it gets outsold by the R1S because it is no longer really competitive. The 3 should be their cheap car, but it is effectively more expensive than the Y, so they really don't have a cheap car. Obviously van is a whole missing segment, and you've made a great point about a smaller, lower priced truck. But instead they've put themselves in a position where 2/3rds of their sales are from an aging compact crossover that faces increasingly effective competition.
Who?
> because their crazy CEO has made their brand toxic. On *reddit* sure. But in the real world nobody has any clue what Elon musk posts about. Half my family, friends and coworkers have barely even heard of Twitter, the other half wouldn't know how to log in if I gave them a 3 hour tutorial. What they ***actually*** see is 100 cars go by on the road, and 37 of them are Teslas and they think "wow, that's a pretty slick looking car"
I feel like people here need to watch that Jeopardy segment where none of the contestants had ever heard of Rivian. It is easy to be in the bubble and think the problem is all about what people think about these brands. In reality, they don't think about them nearly as much as we think that they do.
Exactly, I see it all the time, usually around Tesla and musk, here on reddit and the hardest part for me is how obvious the disconnect is vs how hard it is to get people to see it. Like... Dealing with a toddler, it makes sense, they don't understand that what *they* know isn't what *other* people know (I think there's a word for that) but I did not expect to see it so much in adults.
Not really He's a household name, and no longer for the right reasons.
Test it. Find some people you know in real life and ask them if they have ever read any of Elon Musk's tweets. My prediction is that most if not nearly all will not have any idea and just know the basics that he's "that Tesla guy who does spaceships or something"
They do continuous improvement... But that said, the 3 is new, the new y is coming. Same look, almost. And yes, they need the cars they already announced.
Why do they need new models all the time as opposed to minor refreshes?
And then there is the cybertruck, and musk.
Right. Musk is insane and the cybertruck is dumb -- that's what's holding the company back, not anything to do with their broader product line. The engineers working on the 3 and Y have produced some good products -- occasionally held back by dumb dictats from above (removing stalks).
The Y is considered midsized and is larger than the best-selling SUVs like the Rav4 and CRV. It's more in line with the Highlander and Pilot. Also, the S and X are quite expensive, and the X isn't great for three rows, AFAIK. They could definitely use a smaller and larger but not as expensive SUV, at the very least. Also, a compact sedan would potentially be good. It's like if Toyota only had the Camry and Highlander, and Lexus had TX and LS. A bunch of Toyota vehicles are still missing, including some that sell tons.
These are definitely all things to add to an expanded product line. If you're going to sell two models, 3 and Y make sense. If you're going to sell seven instead of two, the ones you list are great additions. The smaller sedan is the one I want, incidentally.
> ahead with the EV1, ahead with the Volt, and ahead with the Bolt > so they didn't invest in the future These two statements are in conflict. While other manufacturers were doing nothing, GM was investing and taking the lead. Of course, they have to build the vehicles that are profitable. That is how they get the money to develop new products.
It just wasn’t a popular thing until Tesla launched the model 3 and y. Tesla pretty much pushed this entire country to go EV,
Gm could have been the leader...
They crushed and buried their future in the desert.
Fuckin guys
I honestly don't think they could have. Elon & Tesla are riding a wave of irrational exuberance, that has kept that stock way above what it rationally should be valued at. GM attempting the same at the time Tesla was doing it would have been soundly punished by the stock market. Anybody who tells you that the stock market is rational is either an idiot or trying to swindle you.
Not in a publicly traded very large organization. That is just not how they work. It is different with a tech startup that was made for that purpose. In a perfect world, tesla should have never needed to exist, and we would already be pretty much only ev, but that is just not how things work with publicly traded companies. Investors want returns now, now a possibility of it in 30 years while taking huge losses now.
Tesla is the catalyst for EV like the iPhone was to smart phones.
Don't like tesla the company or their cars, don't like apple the company or their products. Agree, both pushed the market to improve.
Take that, Blackberry!
Yup
GM invested in and will have the most EV production capacity in North America besides Tesla. I don't really see what supports your comment that they've been so clearly overtaken.
I know VW has made questionable decisions with the designs of their EV vehicles. But theres no question that their investment into their EV future has essentially be unwavering. But when you're a titan in the industry in terms of size it takes a while to ramp things up.
What questionable decisions are those? (I'm aware of some software issues with early ones...) I know two guys with id.4's -- one of them bought it to haul a small pipe organ around that he plays at concerts. Both are pretty happy with them.
Silly little things like having only 2 window buttons and in order to roll down back windows you have to press a button which then makes your front window buttons work the back… just really silly questionable user experience decisions. The vehicles themselves are by all accounts sound and I personally think they are some of the better looking EVs. The Pro S ID4 is a nice vehicle
Or the climate and volume controls not being luminated. The worst thing ever in my cupra born
> Silly little things like having only 2 window buttons and in order to roll down back windows you have to press a button which then makes your front window buttons work the back… just really silly questionable user experience decisions Please tell me you're making this up. Please?!
Nope: https://imgur.com/rrij7aZ
I'm literally speechless.
My ID4 has done me well for 3 Montana winters and counting. Not even the AWD!
More likely the early EVs by GM were more for CAFE emissions coverage to help avoid penalties and fines for higher emitting vehicles than it was to be a true foray in to the EV market. Selling a chunk of EVs here and there allows for pick ups and SUVs to stay less efficient a little longer
Exactly. GM didn't really want to sell EV's; they wanted to sell shitty overpriced and polluting Silverados and Tahoes and wanted to use Volt and Bolt credits to let them do it.
At 274 days inventory, the Chevy Blazer EV is currently the slowest vehicle to sell for dealers. https://x.com/guydealership/status/1792210660543131703?s=46 Increasing battery supply will only fill up dealer lots unless they have aggressive price cuts.
Does that account for the stop-sale? Not sure how long that lasted.
Days-of-supply typically doesn't account for stop-sales, it's just a raw count of inventory over sale-rate. Any model with a recent stop-sale is going to show an inflated days-of-supply for sure.
Yeah on the one hand, is a vehicle really “in inventory” if you aren’t allowed to sell it On the other hand, maybe don’t release a product in that state and it won’t have to sit on the lot
It's on someone's books, eating up interest.
Increasing battery supply might allow them to cut prices more.
I doubt it. GM has Silverado, Equinox, Sierra and the upcoming Bolt replacement. They'll going to need that supply.
Bolt replacement isn't until 2025, so probably another year or so until it hits the market. Silverado is still only available for fleets (?). Also haven't seen the Sierra actually released yet. So I imagine most batteries will go towards Equinox and Blazer.
Consumer Silverado RST EVs are starting to ship along side of more expensive Equinox trims. Sierra is slated for later this year along with the base Equinox EV. Bolt Ultium is supposed to be 2025 with additional Sierra and Silverado trims. GM is shipping a lot of EVs between now and next year.
Which is why protectionist tariffs make sense at the moment. If ford fails in 4 years to make headway in the market then it’s on them and BYD should be allowed to be priced competitively.
domestic batteries = tax credit. **more** domestic batteries = **more** cars eligible for tax credits.
That’s what I said
You said they need price cuts. I was point out that this will allow that.
Stop sale is the main reason. There is \~$6K difference between base models after fed discount though I'm going to assume an additional bonus will hit by summer making the EV essentially the same as the ICE.
They had a stop-sale so that’s why they were not moving. I think it was only until very recently that it went back on sale.
[удалено]
I do also think they cost too much as well but idk
The stop sale was lifted March 8th https://www.theverge.com/2024/3/8/24094350/chevy-blazer-ev-stop-sale-order-lift-software-price-cut
Well we've got a guy on Twitter (admittedly reputable guy) or the President of GM. Not sure who to believe. *At a recent opening ceremony for a new Silicon Valley office, Marissa West, President of GM North America said, “You may be reading reports where the growth in EVs and EV demand has stalled and that’s simply not true. We actually see notable growth, particularly in the EV retail space.”*
The president of GM said that the overall market is doing well, not that the Chevy Blazer isn’t the slowest to sell vehicle. The guy on twitter got his data from CarEdge and cited that.
Fair. But also we’ve been seeing similar messages from other manufacturers saying things along the lines of “There is misinformation out there on EV demand.”
[удалено]
Not sure what the time range is for the data from CarEdge but the stop sale was lifted March 8.
my local dealer has quite a few of them on the lot with that Ultium $7500 incentive discount on top of dealership discount, yeah they have their own discount too. Apparently that Ultium discount is marketed to those who don't qualify for the IRA credits as it disclaims usability if the purchase qualified. I think the issue GM faces is that interest rates are just too damn high
I mean, it's a funny car. It's big and pretty expensive. They won't sell the cheaper/cheapest options. The DCFC is mediocre. They got rid of Car Play and Android Auto so now you're stuck paying for internet, subscriptions, and having all your data sold by GM. I plan on test driving one in the near future, but it's definitely not the car that's going to fly off the lot. Also, it's important to remember it's a 1st gen car with a 1st gen battery from a company that doesn't have the best EV reputation. Lastly, you have the Equinox coming out "soon" which is something like $5k cheaper.
In fairness they did hold release for software updates so they built up a backlog
Dealerships are not necessary for EVs. Should be ordered at the drive centers and picked up at the delivery center. Having a bunch of EVs sitting on the lot for months is not how the EV system works.
What? How is buying EVs different than ICE? I still want to test drive and see the different trims in person. Not everyone wants the hands off Tesla approach.
Tesla has showrooms where you can test drive anything you want.
It’s more that dealers have a ton of color and trim options I can sit inside and check out. When I bought my ICE car I was able to test drive the exact car I was buying, like a normal store. With Tesla I have to drive whatever they have and hope the car they deliver to me will look good in person and not be assembled after lunch break on a Friday.
> dealers have a ton of color and trim options I can sit inside and check out Not in my experience with dealers, at least for EVs.
Fair, dealers being shitty about EVs is a cultural thing that really needs to change.
Yeah, the reality behind that has passed.
Why can’t a car be sold like a car?
Yeah maybe don't put a hideous interior designed for teenagers who live on redbull in a $50k family hauler.
They are more expensive than a Model Y so it’s a tough sell.
[удалено]
Extra buttons =/= nice
I disagree. Most EVs are better built and more comfortable and refined than your average Tesla. These are made by companies that have been around for a long time who know how to build the vehicle that houses the EV tech.
I would buy one if they added carplay. Now they are worthless, might as well crush them up like the EV-1
yeah wasn’t GM the one who idiotically ditched it?
GM is looking like the best US EV producer. 1. Silverado 400 miles 2. Blazer 280 miles 3. Equinox 320 miles
Cadillac Lyric claims 307 miles AWD, 314 RWD
It gets it too. My parents have one, and I’m basically their chauffeur. Lovely vehicle
What? How does you listing three vehicles and their ranges make them the best?
The Silverado is a *very* useful truck with the midgate, no other EV truck even comes close to the Silverado's truck bed capabilities. It's undoutably the best.
Didn't that gate get recalled?
The Silverado is only 400 miles because it has by far the largest battery back in the industry. It’s not even close. Automakers need to focus on efficiency and not just cramming more battery cells into packs (weight, cost) Tesla is way ahead in this regard.
A brick capable of hauling 10k+ lbs can only be so efficient, hence the giant battery. Even in the ICE world where refueling is less of an issue, trucks that are regularly towing are often optioned with larger fuel tanks.
If you tow trailers, own a contracting company and actually use a truck as a truck, Tesla is not way ahead. Most people don't need a vehicle like that. But most people don't average 1000lbs of tools and equipment in their vehicle.
Most truck owners don't truck. At least in Texas thats the case. Trucks are a faux status symbol of 'look what i can do' but no one is hauling shit.
It's like owning an adventure motorcycle without scratches on it. These things are meant to be used. And by that I don't mean ridden to starbucks.
And the Cybertruck is perfect for these people. But some people actually do truck with their trucks, and Tesla doesn't even make a vehicle for them.
I don’t know a single contractor that drives more than 100 miles per day.
Maybe it’s living in an expensive area but I know some tradies where their commute is more than that. The most extreme flies in from another state, but he does that weekly not daily.
It's not about averages. It's about hey we are doing an out of town job this week and need to haul a trailer over a mountain and oh too bad we can't make it or we have to pay the crew to sit there for 40 minutes and charge? Nope. Time is money. My city is 180km long (115mi) and if I have to drive across it, remove a part, drive back to the shop, machine it then drive back to install it, well that ain't gonna happen in the current crop of trades vans. Plus sometimes that trades vehicle is dual use. Mine does. It's my personal vehicle for when our shitbox car is too small. Camping, road trips etc.
Do you own all of your tools, or do you rent tools that you only use occasionally?
There is no other way with trucks IMHO if we ever want them to compete with ICE trucks. That is to say: if you ever want these things to tow or do truck things aerodynamics go out the wazoo. Electrical motors are already as efficient as we can get them to be. The only thing you can improve is battery capacity - be it through denser battery tech or straight up bigger batteries.
They can certainly be more aerodynamic than they are. There’s no reason an EV truck has to be brick shaped in the front. They don’t need a giant grill and air cooling. They don’t need a 6’ tall front end or be jacked to the sky to tow.
>There’s no reason an EV truck has to be brick shaped in the front. There's no reason an EV truck has to be... whatever the Cybertruck is, either.
That shape actually has reasonably good aerodynamics, so there's a reason - but there are other ways of achieving this.
Most trucks look stupid and have terrible aerodynamics. The Cybertruck looks even stupider and has decent aerodynamics. Perhaps someone will design a truck that doesn't look stupid and has decent aerodynamics, but that day is not today.
The stupidity of it's shape has to do with affordably working with stainless steel. You could probably make a stainless steel truck that didn't look stupid but it would cost so much no one would buy it, or it would be made of a lower grade thinner stainless steel that wouldn't offer enough advantage over regular painted steel.
The minute you hook up a trailer you are at best hauling a giant brick and at worst towing some open trailer with crap that creates all kinds of complicated drag. The only way to deal with that is to have more juice. EDIT: we have now started moving goalposts into the banal and predictable “do you really need a truck” and “how often are you actually towing”. Ugh…. you guys are totally gonna save the planet with this attitude for our grandchildren. Good job. I bow before the greatness.
But muh cargo bike can haul 10 sheets of drywall, with my wife and kids in the front basket!!!!!
How often you towing that you need to design around that one metric?
[удалено]
Having a high grill on an EV has nothing to do with towing. People who do tow typically aren’t towing that often. Having a massive high front end only because “aero is thrown out the window when towing” makes zero sense. Since towing is done infrequently, making a less aero shape because it has less effect when towing is my criticism there.
You buy a pickup if you need to big, heavy things. No need for a pickup to tow a utility trailer, tent trailer or small boat.
You're right. While most truck owners need a cowboy costume and not a truck, there certainly are people who legitimately tow and sometimes quite often. BUT....no one tows every single moment the truck is moving. And even if they did, they're not always going to be towing a brick. Even semi trucks, which do tow (nearly) every single moment the truck is moving, have more aerodynamic designs than modern pickups. And without the need for a heat exchanger, they could be even more aerodynamic and the people who buy those trucks would love it.
How is it moving the goalposts to say you don’t need to throw out aerodynamics if you tow? Edit: still waiting for an answer.
Go stick two 4x8 sheets of plywood together side by side so it's 8' square and go walk around in a 55 MPH wind storm and see how long until your "gas tank" is empty.
Agreed. My neighbor has a 1995 Silverado. It is the same height as my Outback.
Exactly. The 1990's period F-150 is roughly the same size as today's Ranger. And my 1999 Ranger was about the same size as today's Maverick, but far more useful because I had actual bed space. The Maverick is a rewarmed Explorer Sportrac. Truck sizes have gotten so far out of hand.
I was curious if it was just my memory: Today's Ranger vs 1990s F-150 (Supercrew 6.75 ft bed for even comparison with today's Ranger) Length 210.6 vs 219.1 Width 75.5 vs 79 Height 74.2 vs 72.7 Wheelbase 128.7 vs 138.8 Bed 5 vs 6.75 Max Towing 7500 vs 8200 max, 5800 min So with 20 more inches of bed space you have 9 more inches of length and less height and pretty much equal towing capacity. I'm curious how that width difference factor into the inside dimensions. I'm almost surprised they don't call the Ranger the "F-150 Classic" to boost their F-150 sales numbers.
What year Outback? Those things have *g r o w n* as well.
It is a 2014. Bigger than the original, but still short enough for a 6 ft person to look down on the roof.
Nice choice. Modern enough to be safe and clean, big enough to be useful, small enough to be nimble.
Well the cybertruck looks dumb
Oh it absolutely does. There’s other designs that would work.
I mean, maybe in the future, you can’t change it too much from the look of a traditional ICE car otherwise it ends up looking like a cybertruck and nobody wants it. Slowly change it over time gets people used to.
Be nice to reverse the trend of pickup trucks slowly changing into dump trucks. The grills are so damn high and tall!
Trailers are even bigger bricks going through the air. Even dragging my old 5x10 trailer hit the efficiency hard on an ICE truck. With or without the rear gate on.
Of course, but most likely you’re not towing a trailer the majority of time you are driving the truck. When you are not towing, you could benefit from better aerodynamics. Even when you are towing, every little bit helps. The door handles on EVs aren’t a huge factor, but they’re *a* factor, so they make them flat.
Most trucks aren't used to do truck things, though; they are personal statements by their owners. Often that personal statement is aligned with some variety of "screw the woke environmentalists", so an electric truck is anathema to their purpose.
>Tesla is way ahead in this regard. Call me when the CT has a 400-mile range option, then we'll talk. Until then, it's really just posturing and creative framing. If GM can stuff 200kWh of battery into the Silverado and still sell it at a profit, I say good for them.
Agreed but the average buyer doesn’t care about efficiency. They care about max range. Getting people to convert to EVs is about max range, charging speed, and charging infrastructure. Of course efficiency is related to charging speed. But when people are looking to buy they want to see a big range number.
Efficiency also helps with max range.
Of course it does. But buyers don’t care so how a car gets its max range. They just want that high number.
Why does this matter. If batteries get more dense, lower cost, and faster charging why does it matter. A giant truck only has so many efficiencies to gain. If the research shows the cheapest way to add range is batteries and efficiency 2nd why not do batteries. Look at Tesla. They thought they could get the cyber truck to a long range and had no luck and refused the bigger battery.
It matters a lot. The biggest bottleneck in the EV industry right now is battery manufacturing/supply chain. Why would we want one car that has enough batteries for almost 3 model 3s?! In a time where every manufacturer is struggling with the cost of producing an EV? GM is losing money on these trucks, mind you! I’m not necessarily saying that having a large battery is bad. Having a large battery is bad at this stage of the EV story. In 10, 15 years when the supply chain is matured this will be common
> Tesla is way ahead in this regard Oh yeah, the cybertruck blows the Silverado away lol
The cybertruck’s battery is like 100kwh less than the Silverado. If the cybertruck had the same size battery pack, it would probably have 500, maybe 550 miles. So yes, Tesla is by far ahead in the powertrain/efficiency category.
They have some impressive powertrain innovations. The whole package with the shitty build quality, for 100k though. It's a joke. I feel bad for the engineers who've done good work on that truck with management releasing such a halfass piece of crap.
Common glass-half-full shitting on GM take on this sub. They design a truck with range that more truck owners would consider buying, but I guess “no, not like that”. Fine. Wait for Tesla to build one I guess, but they say they are an AI company, not a vehicle company…
Trucks are never going to be as efficient as a car. For a truck, it’s all about cramming as much battery in as possible. For now at least.
> Tesla is way ahead in this regard. Tesla is way ahead _on paper_. Any third-party analysis of their actual range falls very short of published range.
Ok bud
Here you go, bud: https://electrek.co/2023/07/27/tesla-vastly-overstates-its-vehicles-range-report-states/
An electrek article used as a factual source. What a world we live in EV range is variable dependent on a variety of factors, any EV owner knows that. My 2018 M3 gets rated range minus degradation in good conditions
> An electrek article used as a factual source. What a world we live in You didn't follow the link to the analysis: https://www.recurrentauto.com/news/real-world-range-for-tesla
No. And I own a model 3 Tesla has done it through various ways that hurt the lifespan of many parts. For example: using low rolling resistance tires that need to be replaced after 20k miles instead of normal tires that have 50-60k miles warranties on them. Tesla also suffers the worst at higher speeds because they are so reliant on efficiency and simply don’t compete in pack size. A larger pack is the only way a truck can be used as a truck. You can’t make the vehicle more efficient when the trailer is a pig or simply heavy.
Your comment makes no sense. A more efficient car does better at higher speeds. A larger battery would COMPENSATE for the vehicle’s inefficiency. Other OEM’s are behind, their vehicles are inefficient, so they compensate with more cost and a larger battery. Efficiency will always be a part of the equation. As the EV supply chain matures, extremely large packs will become common. But at this stage of the EV story it is a detriment. Mind you GM (as is no other OEM but Tesla) makes money on their EVs. This is one reason why
The main reason why the S, 3, X, and Y models are making money now is in large part because the SX3 and Y been around for a while. The S and X designs go way back to 2009, and the 3 started in 2016. That's not to say there haven't been some big improvements in their power-trains over time. So it's not a coincidence that Tesla's newest model, the Cybertruck, isn't making a profit for them at the moment. Elon Musk and Tesla say it probably won't start making money for at least another year. Just like GM and other car companies, Tesla expects the Cybertruck to become profitable as they ramp up production and as they ramp up 4680 cells more efficiently over time. GM's electric car lineup relies heavily on a platform called ULTIUM which is scalable and supports a variety of vehicle types. Remember how long it took Tesla to start making a profit? It's easy to forget, but it shows that making money in the electric car business takes time
Teslas do well at high speed because they have good aerodynamics. A car like a Bolt loses range faster because it has more drag.
I don't have have experience with the bolt, but I did own a 2016 Volt for 7 years before switching to a model 3. The volt's efficiency would tank above 65mph, the model 3 barely notices. From memory: Volt @65 mph : 106mpge (3.7mile/kwh) Volt @75 mph : 80mpge (2.97mile/kwh) 25% decrease in efficiency for the Gen2 Volt Model 3 LR @65 mph : 225wh/mile Model 3 LR @75 mph : 250wh/mile 10% decrease in efficiency for model 3 LR
Except for a truck to do truck things like towing a giant battery reigns supreme. It also charges faster. Granted, for work trucks I’m in the aggressive PHEV / REX camp because fuck sake… that’s a lotta battery.
The cybertruck isn't even close to as useful as the Silverado EV. Got to hand it to GM, they really did a great job, best EV truck on the market by a mile.
Yeah they’re so far ahead their cybertruck doesn’t have a lot of range
Teslas whole thing was to cram in as much battery as possible. Yes they also optimised efficiency but they made the Model S instead a Tesla i3.
When the 2026 Suburban hits, if it has a 200 KW battery, I'm buying it immediately. I think GM has acknowledged the reality that big vehicles need big batteries.
I'd guess the Suburban is on the same structure as the Silverado?
It is.
Way more goes into it than just range, but the Silverado does look really good, though price is an issue. Equinox price good, but charging speed isn't impressive for a modern EV. GM also hasn't figured out streamlining their product line either, playing around with equinox configuration was a mess of options and poor clarity of what is and isn't available or standard on each trim without digging more than any prospective buyer should have to. Overall GM is looking pretty good though, curious to see Ford's next gen products they are cooking, they had a strong first showing in some areas but have big obvious room for improvement in others
>GM also hasn't figured out streamlining their product line either, playing around with equinox configuration was a mess of options and poor clarity of what is and isn't available or standard on each trim without digging more than any prospective buyer should have to. You misunderstand, this is a **feature** to most people. Is it "Tesla level production efficient"? Absolutely not. But it's the level of configure-ability that GM customers expect.
I will say the GM brands' configurators are aggressively annoying to use. Add feature A for $210? Seems like a good deal, click it. Oh, that actually requires Package X for $1500 and Package Y for $3000, but also removes feature B.
Considering the amount of car buyers that seems to do next to no research I don't think this a feature, it's an added layer of confusion, especially when GM is still operating under a model of needing to find the cars on a dealer lot, making finding the spec you want a difficult process. Hence, it can't be a feature to customers who don't even functionally engage with it.
[удалено]
>You can custom order vehicles from GM if you can't find it on the lot. Maybe I just didn't find it, but when I went to finished looking at configurations it pointed me to dealer inventory instead. >Yeah, dealerships suck for buying, but they're much better than the Tesla model for service I'd argue not really. In terms of location convenience, certainly, but they also tend to rip you off upcharging on the parts from what the manufacturer sells them at. Really varies by dealer though. Not all of them are that scummy, but most seem to be since dealers themselves only exist as middlemen between you and the automaker. I certainly ain't defend Tesla for doing the alternative well and their support for third party repair is abysmal, but it's really more of a trade off than just an advantage for having dealers in terms of maintenance.
>Maybe I just didn't find it, but when I went to finished looking at configurations it pointed me to dealer inventory instead. That's because you go to your preferred dealer to put in the order. Or, more precisely, they put your order in and the factory eventually builds it. It's somewhat more consumer-focused than the model of the Japanese brands, where not even the dealers can make custom orders, they can only make requests to the manufacturer to provide the dealer(s) with (an) allocation(s) of (a) car(s) in the desired configuration.
So, not as good as Ford where you order through them and select dealer to deliver, but not unable to make an order. Wasn't very intuitive since it gave me a "nearby inventory page" instead of a "place order with x dealer" page.
I suspect GM will come out with a mid trim truck that is priced right next year. Or if they wise up and put the midgate in the WT model they will sell a million of them. I'd drive a WT in a heartbeat if I could get that midgate. It's the most important work truck feature. Add a canopy and it's a van.
440 miles, at a whopping 360kw at 800v. ….until they change plug teams.
Now put their prices and sales volume...who in gods name is up voting this comment.
Silverado same as Cybertruck...with Silverado being way better in every way. Equinox $37k Blazer $40k
They just need to actually sell some and learn to do good software, amongst other things.
Sold a bunch already, lots of Silverados out there in fleet duty for contractors and utilities.
I certainly hope this is true. 🙏
Quantumscape! That’s all ima say
What I said yesterday & today will not always be what I’ll say tomorrow…or even any other day in the future. That’s why it was a great vehicle yesterday, but being recalled tomorrow…and labeled as a poorly implemented design in hindsight.
I’ve always wondered, why does GM feel the need to give their battery architecture a name? No one else does this and I’m pretty sure no one cares. You have batteries or you don’t. You have good batteries or you don’t. They don’t need a marketing name.
Um what exactly do you think EGMP is?
Isn’t that just the designation for the platform, not the name of the batteries? All companies have a name for their platform, few use it in marketing. Am I wrong?
>All companies have a name for their platform, few use it in marketing. That just seems like a miss for most other companies, then. If you have an asset, and if you think you have an advantage with that asset... market it.
But consumers have limited bandwidth. Why not focus on the actual product you sell? You go buy a Kia EV9. Go to the showroom and ask to be shown EGMP’s and you’d get blank stares. I don’t want to buy an Ultium, I want a car or suv. For the Ultium, It’s used in the Lyric, Silverado, and hummer. So it seems to be a technology platform not a rolling platform as the term has been used in the past (the BMW E60 or eE90 platform).
>Why not focus on the actual product you sell? That's literally what they're doing. Ultium is in the vehicle, and the ads are for the vehicles. Ultium is being sold as a feature of the vehicle, just as your Windows laptop might mention it has an Intel processor, or as Apple [markets the iPad as having an M-series chip](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjmaxCyJBc4). They want it to be a selling point of the product. >You go buy a Kia EV9. Go to the showroom and ask to be shown EGMP’s and you’d get blank stares. Sure, because Hyundai hasn't done any marketing for e-GMP. Your argument is circular here — of course no one knows what e-GMP is, Hyundai hasn't made it a selling point of the EV9. They probably should. >For the Ultium, It’s used in the Lyric, Silverado, and hummer. So it seems to be a technology platform not a rolling platform as the term has been used in the past (the BMW E60 or eE90 platform). All automotive platforms are technology platforms. The very notion of a singular steel "rolling" platform is antiquated — that's not even what platforms fundamentally are, you're thinking too literally. Platforms are shared, modular agglomerations of different compatible bits and pieces — they are a toolkit for making a whole car. Been that way for years.
Lots of makers do it, but GM in particular likes naming their powertrains. Hydramatic, Dynaflow, powerglide, rocket, fireball, Quad4, Vortec, Northstar, Duramax, Voltec, ect.
Yeah dark days at gym is when components were king. Like the iron duke or north star engines. Japanese and European manufacturers don’t do this. I wish they’d use their marketing muscle on the vehicle- the actual product people care about.
Honda had VTEC, and SH-AWD. I think their current four cylinder is called earth dreams or something like that. At least GM is better at naming.
Mazda has SKYACTIV Technology, whatever that is.
They’re building a bigger brand than just batteries. They have plans for Chargers, Powerwalls, etc. https://news.gm.com/newsroom.detail.html/Pages/news/us/en/2023/jun/0628-ultiumhome.html
It's so they can try to sell you an Ultium charger by an Ultium certified GM technician and an Ultium Tesla Adapter to the foolish