
I Drove Chevrolet's Bolt - mhb
http://www.businessinsider.com/chevrolet-bolt-ev-ces-2016-4
======
FunnyLookinHat
This might sound ridiculous, but I really just don't want GM to win. The
American automotive industry moved ridiculously slowly towards electric and
alternative fuel vehicles, and ultimately is only doing so to sell units on
what they perceive as a new niche.

If I'm giving money to a company for a new type of transportation, it's going
to be the one committing to the broad goals of bettering humanity, not just
capitalizing on someone else proving the existence of a market.

I'm not just behind Tesla, there are other companies like Arcimoto
([https://www.arcimoto.com/](https://www.arcimoto.com/)) that are putting
significant effort into redesigning transportation from the ground up.

~~~
notatoad
In really don't like framing this as winning or losing. Tesla has already won
- they've successfully entered the market, they have customers and are making
money (plenty of revenue at least, I don't know about profit)

I want electric cars to win. That doesn't happen if Tesla is the only company
making them.

~~~
ry_ry
More importantly, multiple entrants into the electric vehicle market will
drive development in new directions.

If it were only Tesla doing anything of note - with all the best will in the
world - the evolution of products would ultimately stagnate as they refined
their own particular flavour of electric vehicle.

A monopoly held by a young, interesting company is still a monopoly.

~~~
marssaxman
Indeed. I'm happy to see Tesla succeeding, because I love their moxie and feel
like the Big 3 have had a forcible perspective shift coming for a long while
now, but I have no interest in buying one of Tesla's cars. The powertrain is
great but I hate the cockpit and the "phone home" stuff. I am looking forward
to future competition which moves into the market Tesla is prying open and
offers a car which I might be happy to drive.

------
itg
One thing I like about the Bolt over the Tesla 3 is the fact that it has
buttons for climate control and basic music functions. I'm really not a fan of
where your are forced to do everything on a giant touchscreen stuck to the
middle of the dash.

~~~
toddmorey
I thought I'd miss physical buttons, too, but I don't. I really don't. It's
very easy to use the touchscreen in a Tesla. Plus, you do have physical
buttons available for climate: they are on the steering wheel (if you decide
to chose that option).

~~~
marcoperaza
Can you safely operate the entertainment system while driving? With physical
buttons, I can turn the volume knob or cycle through radio station presets
without taking my attention off the road. With a touch screen, you don't get
tactile feedback and modal dialogs or different screens can block controls, so
you have to divert your gaze and attention to the screen. I haven't driven in
a Tesla, so maybe they've figured it out.

~~~
mdorazio
Only if you use the steering wheel controls. Despite what others may believe,
anything you need to do on the giant touch screen absolutely cannot be done
safely while driving.

~~~
mikeash
I wonder, is there actual evidence that physical buttons are better? I don't
doubt that screwing with a touchscreen while driving is dangerous, but I have
to wonder about the common wisdom that screwing with physical buttons while
driving isn't.

~~~
mdorazio
Yes, distraction.gov has some research you might be interested in, based on
studies of actual car crashes. Note that the key point is distraction, not
necessarily touchscreens by themselves. The problem is that it's impossible to
use a touchscreen without looking at it, which means you're not looking at the
road, and are thus distracted. NHTSA basically says that if it takes more than
a single quick glance to perform an action, it's dangerous. This is why most
OEMs lock out the touch screen controls while the car is in motion.

~~~
thrownaway2424
Ha! most OEMs like which ones? I've never seen a car where the touchscreen
controls are locked while driving. At most I've seen ones that either won't
let you use a touch keyboard while driving, or that will let you do that,
after tapping a warning message about that being dangerous.

~~~
vinay427
Lexus vehicles used to do this, at least back in 2006, so that you could only
operate basic functions but could not set navigation destinations, etc. It was
a huge pain, but given the touchscreen-only interface it made sense to
minimize distractions. With my current car in one of the best designed control
wheel UIs in the industry, I can navigate the menus almost exclusively without
looking at the display (given some practice).

------
alkonaut
The Bolt (if the numbers $30k and 200+ miles) means that a company that isn't
Tesla can build a car that is competitive at least on range/price with the
Model3.

I thought Tesla had an advantage on battery tech and/or production that meant
the competition had to produce vastly inferior (on range) cars, such as the
leaf/i3 etc.

If GM can produce a 200+ mile range EV at this cost, then Toyota, VW or BMW
should soon be able to produce a _good_ 200+ mile EV at a competitive price.

~~~
thrownaway2424
Tesla does not have and never had any battery tech. They use off-the-shelf
Panasonic batteries that are exactly the same ones you put in flashlights[1].

Tesla made one major innovation. They realized that people will buy an
electric car for $100,000. That's really it! They have an attractive and very
good car, but it is market innovation that is Tesla's essential advantage.

1: [http://www.amazon.com/NCR18650B-3400mAh-Rechargeable-
Battery...](http://www.amazon.com/NCR18650B-3400mAh-Rechargeable-Battery-
Panasonic/dp/B00DHXY72O)

~~~
carlivar
> Tesla made one major innovation

You haven't ridden in a Tesla doing its self-driving thing, have you?

I didn't care about Tesla until I rode in one doing this.

~~~
superuser2
Other cars at similar price points were doing the same things years, sometimes
a decade ago. Tesla's innovation was marketing them to techies on the Google
self driving hype train rather than as safety features for the country club
set.

~~~
carlivar
Which ones? I don't mean just staying in your lane. The car I was in stopped
at a red light (technically just following the car in front of it, which also
stopped). Though I haven't researched the history of this feature.

~~~
oblio
At least the Volvo V40 has that. And it's not a luxury car :)

~~~
dysfunction
> Volvo

> not a luxury car

~~~
oblio
> Volvo

> not a luxury car in Europe

------
spectrum1234
Why does every non Tesla electric look so ugly? And why does every article
written by supposedly competent journalists not mention how ugly literally
ever other electric car is when they discuss tradeoffs?

It could very well be a close race between 2-5 electric cars. But
attractiveness could be another reason 1 is the big winner.

~~~
carlivar
The Ford Focus Electric looks fine.

I think there are other electric cars out there that are the electric version
of a "typical" car.

My theory is automakers want the car to stand out, even if it's ugly, since
otherwise how will anyone know you are driving an electric vehicle?

~~~
ptaipale
VW Golf is sold with the same outward chassis in electric, plug-in hybrid,
regular hybrid, gasoline and diesel models.

(The electric has a practical range of about 80 to 120 km, i.e. around 100
miles, so not a great success.)

~~~
ZeroGravitas
I generally take this as a bad sign. Full-EV cars are substantially different
in their requirements from ICE engined cars, not taking advantage of that just
hobbles them.

For example, the Tesla 3 pushes the passenger space forward and backwards to
fit more people in the same space. It can do so because there's no big, heavy
engine up front. Starting with a traditional car body and adding electric is
just going to waste space.

~~~
ptaipale
Yes, but internally the eGolf is not quite the same structure as combustion
engine models.

Also the most iconic full EV car, Tesla model S, looks very much like
combustion engine cars. In fact, from distance it's hard to tell it apart from
a Ford Mondeo, the symbol of mediocrity (at least in the UK) which is also a
fine and nicely contoured car.

The more distinctly formed EV cars, on the other hand, look about as weird as
Granma Duck's 1916 Detroit Electric; they have some futuristic aerodynamics
but on the desirability scale, they seem to suck.

~~~
ZeroGravitas
The externals are driven by aerodynamics and should be converging generally.

The interior is where there's a bunch of new rules in play, with the front
mounted ICE being replaced with a floor of batteries and between wheel motors.
That directly allows Tesla to be amongst the safest cars ever built, and to
fit more passengers, more comfortably than similarly sized ICE cars.

Tesla needs those advantages to balance out initial shortcoming of EV cars, at
lower mass-market price points that becomes even more important.

------
hristov
He said the traction control engaged when accelerating out of some corners.
That may be the result of high torque or a badly designed car.

I really hope they do not make the mistake of making this a front wheel drive
car. A front wheel drive car when combined with a high torque electric motor
is basically asking for trouble. The high torque applied to the front wheels
screws up the steering, makes it imprecise, causes understeer, or in extreme
cases even the loss of steering control.

This was a problem with the Chevy Spark electric. It was very fast but, when
you slam on the gas, you lose all steering input and the car tends to veer to
the right and there is nothing you can do about it. (except of course to let
go of the gas, so you can get the steering back).

Electric engines are so small there is a lot of flexibility designers have as
to where to place them. It would be a huger mistake if bold designers placed
them in the front.

[Edit: I meant understeer not oversteer]

~~~
Sir_Vival
Large portions of people that live where it snows will only drive a front
wheel drive (or all wheel drive) vehicle. My first car was a $400 rear wheel
drive beast, so it doesn't bother me - but a lot of people think I'm crazy
driving my (rear wheel) Camaro in the winter.

~~~
torgoguys
Yep, this. I don't care about crazy good performance, but do want something I
feel handles reliably in snowy and icy conditions.

Call me an unskilled driver, but I don't feel as confident in bad conditions
with rear wheel drive.

~~~
dsfyu404ed
You're an unskilled driver.

Traction is traction. No matter how a car handles it'll handle the same way on
every surface, the traction threshold will be different. No matter which
wheels are driven turning and braking is the same. In a straight line it
front/rear doesn't really matter. RWD will slip out, FWD will just spin and in
either case the driver (the one's that aren't the worst of the worst) will
lift off the throttle before anything bad happens. In a modern car traction
control will just work it's magic and you wouldn't even know. Ditto for
turning from a stop. The driven wheels are irreverent to turning while
slowing. The problem is in a long sweeping turn that the driver wants to
accelerate out of, like a highway ramp. FWD will just plow straight into
whatever is outside the turn. RWD will do the same thing but the car will be
oriented differently. No matter which wheels are driven if you break traction
in a turn you're going to go wide, better hope you've got enough space to
correct it. The safety advantage with understeer is that if you do something
monumentally stupid (e.g. drunk guy takes highway off ramp at 90mph) the front
of the car with all it's crash test safety will be between you and the
consequences of your actions.

The RWD vs FWD thing is more of a "what I don't know can't hurt me." The
novice won't notice a little bit of understeer whereas anyone will notice a
little bit of oversteer and everyone who can't apply a reasonable amount of
self control to their right foot should bend over, grab their ankles and spend
their money on some snow tires.

The Miata club of Alaska was featured in one of the car magizines (I forget
which) and they basically said "Everyone that thinks we're insane for driving
these cars year round in Alaska should know that the design characteristics
that help maximize use of available traction in the dry don't stop working in
the snow."

~~~
tzs
You are overlooking weight distribution. The traction of a given tire on a
given surface generally increases as the weight on that tire increases. Given
two otherwise similar cars, one with the engine over the drive wheels, and one
with the engine over non-drive wheels, the former will generally have an
advantage in snow, especially on hills.

~~~
kalleboo
Agreed, but if we move the conversation back to electric cars - they might not
have the same weight distribution, right? The Tesla uses direct drive on the
wheels (the Leaf seems to use a more traditional "one motor in the front"
configuration though), and then you have the huge battery spread out over the
floor

------
dangrossman
I'll be replacing a Leaf with a Bolt at the end of the year. I think it's an
attractive looking car myself, and the hatchback form factor has grown on me.
The tech features (10" tablet with android/carplay, built-in LTE wifi, rear
camera mirror, birds-eye surround camera system, collision alerts) will all be
exciting upgrades compared to the Leaf, which is a pretty barebones car even
at the top trim level. The Model 3 could be my household's second car
(currently a non-EV), but that's almost 3 years out for east coast delivery
even if Tesla's perfectly on-time and 10x's their production capacity in a
year. Plus, the purchase incentives will probably be long gone by then.

~~~
akhilcacharya
Did you lease the Leaf or purchase outright?

~~~
dangrossman
I bought a used 2012-SL with 15K miles for about $10K last year. Got a $500 EV
charger on Amazon, and installed it for $125. I loved my first test drive in
an EV and really don't want to go back to a conventional car as my daily
driver. The 5-year-old battery only gets 70-some miles to a charge on a good
day, so I'm looking forward to something longer range in the next year. That
limits me to either a Bolt or a plug-in hybrid like the Volt. I'm leaning
toward the Bolt, especially if I can get my hands on one before winter is in
full swing.

~~~
akhilcacharya
Just $10K? That's amazing! I was thinking that a leased new model of the Leaf
(or preferably the Bolt) would be ideal given the battery issues.

------
fossuser
I know this is subjective and shouldn't matter, but I think the Bolt is ugly.

In fact out of all the non-Tesla EVs the only one I don't find ugly is the
Fiat 500e which is only sold in CA (and now Oregon) as a compliance car and
its own CEO hates it. It is a nice little EV though.

All of this also ignores the coming autonomous cars which I think are going to
be here sooner than people realize (maybe this is the big part 2 of the model
3 reveal). When that happens I'm not confident the existing car companies will
be able to compete - they're desperately trying to acquire the necessary tech
now, but it's a little late.

~~~
lotharbot
do you include hybrid EVs like the Volt and Prius in your "ugly" list?

Personally, I love my Volt. I only use gasoline on rare occasions -- a couple
of out-of-state trips per year -- but don't have to make long stops (30
minutes is long for me) at charging stations along the way. And I think it's a
pretty cool looking car. But then, I'm over 30, so what do I know about cool?

~~~
shifter
A typical time constant for a supercharger stop is 15 minutes.

~~~
mikeash
You might have one that short from time to time, but typical is 20-30 minutes
in my experience.

~~~
shifter
Interesting, on a trip from the Bay Area to Tahoe, it's about 15 minutes each.
I stand corrected :-)

------
Shivetya
I am looking forward to the Bolt, might even go that route as I like the form
factor a bit more than the traditional sedan route Tesla taking. That and I
would like to do 200+ mile range EV before 2020 rolls around.

The one thing that the Bolt raises more so than the 3 is that it will
invalidate the pricing this year for any EV that gets under 100 mile range and
wants to charge near 30k. When this car reaches the lot people are going to
question how the other manufacturers think they can justify near 30k or 50k in
the case of BMW pricing for sub 100 miles. Even Chevy might have some issues
with range extender Volt which has 50 EV miles. I can imagine some shoppers
thinking, it gives up 150EV miles for a gas engine?

Then finally when the 3 is available in quantity the other manufacturers
better have 200 mile range EVs of their own or severely discounted lower range
EV. Most will use EVs to up their fleet fuel mileage but some may find a real
market there. Granted even all those reservations for the 3 look nice but 300k
isn't squat when up against numbers of all cars just sold in the US let alone
world wide

~~~
lotharbot
> _" I can imagine some shoppers thinking, it gives up 150EV miles for a gas
> engine?"_

Sure -- I think the Volt is targeting a different use case, of people whose
daily commutes are less than 40-50 total miles but who occasionally make long
trips.

It's basically the perfect car for me (I bought a 2013 Volt off-lease a few
months ago.) I'm a stay-at-home dad, my wife works from home, and most of the
driving I do is to locations within a 5-mile radius (family, church, the
grocery store, and a handful of restaurants.) Two or three times per year, we
travel out of state, at which point I'm glad for the ~340 mile combined range
and would be disappointed with having to stop every 200 miles and sit for 30+
minutes waiting for a full charge.

But for someone who regularly travels 50-200 miles per day, the Bolt or 3 or
other EVs in that class might be a much better option.

------
gambiting
Question - why almost all electric cars have to be incredibly ugly? Like it's
a requirement for a car to be electric almost. Nissan Leaf looks like a fridge
turned sideways, BMW i3 looks like a collection of parts designed by different
people which don't really match together, Vauxhall(Opel) Ampera looks like
someone smashed a Prius with a hammer, Tesla's and BMW i8 look ok but these
are premium cars, and now the Bolt has a back that looks like a back of one of
those dummy cars they use for crash testing.

I understand there's a push for "hey, I'm different, I'm electric!" but I know
quite a few people who would be in a market for a new Leaf but they won't buy
it because of the looks, it's almost like it's impossible to put electric
motor and batteries into a shape that looks like a conventional car.

------
phkahler
I'd really like to have an electric Corvette. If anyone wants to work on a
conversion, I could get on board with that.

~~~
slfnflctd
My dream for years has been to get a '79 Stingray shell, build it as electric
and do a fully modernized interior. I've just always loved that particular
body style.

Perhaps one day we'll be able to order totally custom cars and have robots
build them for us at a reasonable price. Now that's what I'd call progress.

------
vvanders
One thing that always seems missing from these comparison articles is the
Supercharger network.

It makes such a huge difference, I just don't see how CCS catches up(not to
mention that there's no long term planning around it).

~~~
dangrossman
There are no Superchargers near me, or anywhere near my route to family on the
holidays. Tesla's network outside of California is so sparse as to be useless
for much of the country. Here's the map of Tesla's 613 supercharging stations
(right) versus 27000 public non-Tesla chargers (left):

[http://i.imgur.com/Ktg8h3W.png](http://i.imgur.com/Ktg8h3W.png)

So the fact that _Tesla_ has no good answer to remote charging for most of the
US hasn't stopped it from selling cars outside of California. You're more
likely to have a non-Tesla quick charger on any given route than a
Supercharger, and if you own a non-Tesla EV/hybrid, you'll probably be able to
use it "out of the box", where a Tesla will need a $450 plug adapter. If I
want to drive west, I won't run into a Tesla Supercharger for about 250 miles
-- outside the Model 3's range -- but I'll pass 9 quick chargers from other
operators on the way.

Long-term to reach millions of EV unit sales a year, car makers -might- need a
better answer to charging away from home, if other technology and social
changes don't obviate the need. In those coming years, Blink/Chargepoint/etc
have lots of time to continue expanding their networks -- including adding
more quick chargers, more plug types, and more reliability -- and can likely
do it faster than Tesla or any other single company can on their own.

~~~
mikeash
"Tesla's network outside of California is so sparse as to be useless for most
people."

This statement is exaggerated beyond all connection to reality. Yes, there are
holes, but coverage outside of California is still quite good for the most
part. If you live in or need to travel to Arkansas or West Texas or North
Dakota then you're going to have trouble, but the vast majority of the
population is covered at this point.

Non-Tesla chargers vastly outnumber Tesla chargers, but the speed just isn't
adequate. Most of them are _far_ too slow for long trips. The fast DC chargers
that are out there are just _barely_ adequate. You'll top out at maybe 150MPH
of charging, while Tesla's can hit 360MPH.

~~~
dangrossman
I'm really not exaggerating. Look at that Supercharger map again. Put a
pinpoint on it randomly, and imagine this is where you live. Put another
pinpoint 120 miles away, and imagine this is where you have family in the next
city over. 99% of the time, there will be no Supercharger anywhere near the
line between you and your destination. That's the kind of trip people actually
make and have range anxiety about -- visiting the grandparents for Christmas
-- not the road trip to the other side of the country where you can plan on
driving the wrong way for 70 miles to get onto the nearest Tesla-covered
route. It's these trips that the Supercharger network is pretty useless for,
because it only exists in this weird east-west-north-south grid with entire
states empty in the middle of half the lines it draws. Chargers aren't like
cell phone stations; they don't provide "coverage" to some radius, they're
single points of utility.

~~~
chroma
That thought experiment isn't very useful, because people aren't randomly
distributed across the continent. Much of the plains and rockies are empty of
people.[1]

1\.
[https://johnstonarchitects.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/pop_l...](https://johnstonarchitects.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/pop_lg.jpg)

~~~
jschwartzi
This may be true, but this is also exactly the kind of country you might want
to drive through on your way from your home to a destination.

~~~
chroma
Tesla has supercharger stations on the major freeways through unpopulated
areas. And they're building more. This is effectively a non-problem.
Affordability is a much bigger bottleneck for them.

------
nomercy400
There should really be some additional metrics for these kind of reviews.

So you got to drive a car for a testdrive/hour/week? How is maintenance? How
are charging times? How does it compare to a normal car during its lifecycle?
How much is the battery worth after 1000 charge cycles? How much will the car
be worth when I want to sell it?

With a normal car, I have an idea that I can fuel it 1000 times and it will
still work, albeit the maintenance of which I have a general idea as well. How
does translate to an EV car?

I still have so many questions.

------
oDot
The most important feature of the Teslas, in my opinion, is safety. If I had
to choose between a Bolt and a Model 3 -- poor safety ratings would have been
a deciding factor.

Also, I hope it can't be "benchmark-optimized" like in web browsers.

~~~
csours
I think I understand what you are saying, but official crash test ratings have
not been released for either vehicle yet.

I don't think crash test safety can be "benchmark-optimized" per se; outside
companies do the testing and the proof is in the pudding, so to speak.
However, there may be vehicle incidents that would not be covered by safety or
crash tests. The safety dollars go to mitigating incidents with the highest
rate of fatalities.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidemiology_of_motor_vehicle_...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidemiology_of_motor_vehicle_collisions#Proportion_of_deaths_by_type_of_impact)

Disclaimer: I work for GM, but not on this product. Any opinions are my own.

~~~
762236
Tesla has a history of addressing safety in a way that no other manufacturers
seem to prioritize for (given that car design is over constrained and you have
to compromise somewhere). I would be really surprised if the Bolt earned
5-star ratings in every category. On Tesla's Model S, they designed to achieve
5-star if the tests were applied everywhere on the car --- not just the
official test points.

~~~
csours
I would agree that Tesla has a history of safety, and that is laudable. I hope
you are surprised by the Bolt's safety rating when it comes out.

It is really great that Tesla has prioritized safety.

They do have a few things going for them that other OEMs don't:

    
    
      * Only two models in production, both of which are on the same architecture. (soon to be three)
    
      * No history of failure:
    
      - GM's X-frame
    
      - Really bad seatbelts: Nearly everyone until the 1980s
    
      - Chevy Corvair (Thanks Nader!) [1]
    
      - Pintos catching on fire
    
      - Audi 5000 unintended acceleration in the 1980s
    
      - Pontiac Fieros catching on fire
    
      - Ford Explorers rolling over
    
      - GM's key switch issue
    
      - Toyota's unintended acceleration
    

When you look at all of those, you can see that at the time, either the
engineers didn't care about safety (most OEMs until the 1970s), didn't
prioritize safety, just missed something, or they didn't realize that a
particular design had safety implications.

Tesla has learned all of those lessons and that's great. Most other OEMs have
also learned those lessons, and that's great too!

1\. Nader has been credited with pushing for consumer safety generally and
vehicle safety specifically.

Disclaimer: again, all opinions are solely my own.

------
iamdave
I'm interested as heck to know more about this instrumentation panel showing
"technique" as an indicator for the car's energy consumption. Ostensibly using
gamification to encourage more conscious driving?

~~~
dangrossman
Pretty much all hybrids and EVs do the gamification thing. Honda's got "eco
score", Ford has "efficiency leaves", Nissan has "trees", etc. The more
economically you drive, the more .. things .. you collect on the dashboard.

~~~
ZeroGravitas
My standard ICE Honda does this too. A green arrow to tell me to switch
up/down a gear and a row if up to 5 green dots to tell me when I'm driving
efficiently (e.g. accelerating gently or coasting to a stop, not harsh
acceleration followed by hard braking).

------
Keyframe
In other news, Chevrolet ceased sales of new cars in Europe altogether. No
more Chevrolet for Europe. GM needs this to work.

~~~
ptaipale
That's pretty much just a badging thing. GM sells European cars with the Opel
badge (and Vauxhall in the UK).

Chevrolet Volt was same as Opel Ampera, for example (but it had so bad sales
that it was discontinued).

~~~
Keyframe
True to an extent, because not all Chevrolet vehicles are re-branded nor are
they available throughout Europe.

~~~
ptaipale
In fact, in December 2013 GM announced that it withdraws the Chevrolet brand
from Europe, with just a couple of exceptions of "iconic vehicles" (Corvette
and Camaro), plus the Russian market where they will continue.

So, you can't really buy any new Chevrolet badged cars in Europe.

[http://www.chevrolet.co.uk/owners-area/important-customer-
in...](http://www.chevrolet.co.uk/owners-area/important-customer-
information.html)

The Chevrolets sold in Europe were almost exclusively made in South Korea.
American cars and car brands have a rather lousy quality reputation in Europe.

------
brightball
I still don't understand why anyone would buy a Tesla 3 or a Bolt over a Volt
at this point in time for recharge time and infrastructure.

~~~
aetherson
You shouldn't be downvoted for this. It's a legit comment.

I feel like there's a pretty major hidden cost in hybrids in that you now have
to maintain the gasoline engine (and potentially entire drivetrain) as well as
the electric one. You kind of get the worst of both worlds there -- plus you
have a weight penalty of course.

I have very little use for >200 mile/day drives, so getting an electric that
can handle my 99% driving case sounds better to me than getting a Volt which
I'll still need to semi-regularly fill up and maintain.

------
warfangle
Why does it look like a new balance?

------
1024core
"the Bolt will feature 4G LTE connectivity and OnStar support, " ... so GM can
track you and sell the data.

