This family of electric motors will drive GM’s new electric vehicles

GM will have 22 new EVs on sale by 2023, and they'll all use these motors.

Read the whole story

 

[traumadog]

Interesting. So with a basic front-drive unit (how does it differ from the Bolt unit?) and an "assist" unit, the new Bigger Bolt can be AWD. Being able to burn more kw in two motors, of course, requires a bigger battery, which requires a bigger vehicle, etc etc. The key benefit of a Bolt, besides being electric with adequate (barely) range and (reasonably) performance, is that it provides a good amount of usable space inside of a small exterior package. Yes, I know, that doesn't sell in the US which is undoubtedly why the Bigger Bolt is coming and will almost certainly replace the current model entirely. Bets that the bigger one won't have any more seating room than the current one? If they improve the comfort of the front seats, though, it'll be worthwhile (can I retrofit them?).

Why would a second motor in the Bolt "burn more kW"?

It's not like there's a huge range difference between the single and dual motor Teslas...

I have a 200hp motor in a small Bolt. I add 100hp in the back of a larger Bolt that's heavier (in part the bigger battery). I use more power than the basic Bolt because it's bigger and heavier (and more fun, being AWD). I need the bigger battery to feed both motors and still get 250+ miles range. Of course, the maximum power of the current drivetrain is seldom used, as is true of most non-racing vehicles, which is why it averages 4 mi/kwh (competitive with Tesla). Bigger, heavier, and more power, though, will inevitably require more battery (perhaps not linearly more) to service it.

Going to the limit, I really doubt the full-size EV pickups will even break 3 miles/kwh by much; the big Europeans (SUVs) are mostly in the 2's or low 3's. A EV pickup is a different use case than a Long Range Model 3 or S, and can tolerate higher energy consumption as long as the range is reasonable.

I think the bigger battery argument holds because of the bigger vehicle.

But by itself, a 2-motor vehicle doesn't require a bigger battery.

Example:
Tesla Model S 75: 249 mi range
Tesla Model S 75 259 mi range

If we suppose the total power output stays the same, but it's worth noting that most times a dual-motor setup is done for more power output, which usually means a bigger battery is needed to support that discharge rate.

Sure... but I also asked how many folks are driving at full discharge all the time. As long as the current sized battery can manage the peak flow, having two motors doesn't automatically mean "must need bigger battery".

 

[SiberX]

You might as well ask Americans to stop being American if you're going to demand they stop driving massively oversized vehicles.

We already gave up our supersize fries, don’t ask us to downsize any further!

I’m curious how well GM might support the crate market. It would be nice to have some (near) drop in replacements for older vehicles. Yes, I’m the type of person who would happily drive around an EV 70’s Cutlass.

The fact that they've integrated the "power electronics" (I assume this means the inverter, primarily) into the motor package will be a big win for crate motor users. A big part of handling an EV drivetrain is dealing with all the high voltage connections (and their associated safety interlocks) and cooling connections, so having a single pair of coolant fittings and DC cables for the entire assembly (not to mention only needing one set of mounts) will make things a lot easier to retrofit into other applications.

It might be minor loss from a repairability standpoint, but I expect specific subcomponents within the assembly can still be swapped out. Failures in the motor/inverter assembly should be quite rare unless there's a serious design problem anyway, since most of it is solid-state electronics and an electric motor has very few moving parts compared to a gas one.

 

[Travis Butler]

You might as well ask Americans to stop being American if you're going to demand they stop driving massively oversized vehicles.

Please define "massively oversized". Thank you. Just because one young person with excellent knees can get in and out of a BRZ doesn't mean that I can, even though I'd like to. So I drive a Volvo XC60 for normal stuff and a Ford Ranger for hauling stuff. Both of these are stupidly heavy for their size but they have good entry access heights. But the electric versions will probably be be even heavier.

Funny, the rest of the world seems to manage just fine for those who aren't 'young people with excellent knees', without making large SUVs.

For that matter, the US managed just fine without SUVs for decades.

In what way is the SUV somehow 'special' or necessary for the US?

 

[Scandinavian Film]

As you might expect, the main focus for this third generation of electric motors has been efficiency.

So they're building a new Hummer? Really?

I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Making big, heavy and inefficient vehicles "electrical" does almost nothing for the environment.

We need a change in car culture, where the total pollution/CO2 footprint-per-mile matters. We do not need to convert a whole pile of polluting ICE vehicles to polluting EVs.

If we're going to get all high-horsey, why stop at small vehicles, when personal vehicles of any sort are so much more wasteful than buses and trains? I could make the argument that, had we instead gotten people onto electrified public transit instead of developing things like the Bolt or the Tesla models, we would use even fewer resources, have lower carbon emissions, and would have increased safety for pedestrians and cyclists. If you can expect people to give up trucks and SUVs, I can expect you to give up personal vehicles, no?

 

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

You might as well ask Americans to stop being American if you're going to demand they stop driving massively oversized vehicles.

"I need my armored luxury tank to drive to work, drive home. Keep my children safe as I run down yours while I talk on my cell phone."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1t68CU4owo

 

[1Zach1]

I'm all for changes to regulation to move away from trucks/SUVs.

So while you all are busy getting that knocked out over the next 30 years, I look forward to car companies introducing BEV trucks and SUVs to replace 70-80% (maybe even higher if range keeps increasing, charging times keep decreasing and the automotive PR against them goes away) of the hundreds of thousands of ICE versions sold every year.

 

[Sheep Disorder]

However, EVs are rapidly reaching the point where if you don't live in the deep boonies they're practical.

I don't know how long these things have been out, but I saw a battery-powered lawnmower the other day at Lowes. Never in my dreams as a youth would I have imagined that we have finally reached this point, give the near-century stalling of vehicle battery technology.

Twenty years ago when electric vehicles were no longer an instant punch-line, I though they would be perfect replacements for commuter cars, which make up the bulk of gas-burning vehicles getting sold. Your average Camry driver won't care what's under the hood as long as the driving experience is decent and, critically, there is a workable recharging network in place. Assuming all that, ICE applications could be narrowed down to performance/specialty cars and trucks. Unfortunately, in the interim, SUVs have planted themselves firmly in the 'Murican psyche, so with that as a current reality I'm all for making those dinosaurs run on electrons.

This decade could be (and should be) the turning point where the majority of vehicles sold will be electric. I think we're finally there.

Battery powered lawnmowers have been around for years such as the Black and Decker CMM1000 with a lead acid battery (since early 2000s and one that I owned). Now there are many lithium ion versions on the market as well as other yard tools and all are actually being actively marketed. However all have the same problem of cars - running out of charge and time to recharge (spare batteries needed).

 

[Stuart Frasier]

You might as well ask Americans to stop being American if you're going to demand they stop driving massively oversized vehicles.

I don't expect individual Americans to make the choice. I expect policymakers to actually fucking do something about the problem.

Really? In a country where one of the only two political parties is in the process of being captured by an insane conspiracy theory that boils down to the protocols of the elders of Zion, you think we have policymakers capable of solving problems?

And the other one looks at the rest of us as either you're with us or you're against us. Two words: term limits. Get that in place, and then the process can begin on fixing all the other shit that's gone belly up since the early 90's.

Don't you dare bothsides this. And ffs, you think churning a bunch of inexperienced newbie lawmakers who never accumulate enough legislative experience to know what they're doing is the solution to the problem?

And why not display both sides as failing the American public? The vast majority of this nation's voting block is squarely in the middle with slight variations to the left, right, or true neutral in the center. Currently we have career politicians. Think about that for a moment. Being a politician should never be the sole career. And the fact that the large majority are lawyers should make everyone pause. How many of the people we elect actually represent what the rest of us do for a living? Are there any plumbers, electricians, bakers, nurses, engineers, small business owners, or any other job that props up this nation in the legislature? As far as I can see the past couple decades, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Wipe them all out including the most powerful on the left and right: Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell. Never give them enough time to consolidate into tribes.

Yes, let's have all the people running the country be amateurs. There's nothing that can possibly go wrong there. We're currently finding out what happens when you have a non-politician as president, good and hard. This would be a dumb opinion at the best of times, but it is amazing stupid at this moment.

 

[LieutenantLefse]

However, EVs are rapidly reaching the point where if you don't live in the deep boonies they're practical.

I don't know how long these things have been out, but I saw a battery-powered lawnmower the other day at Lowes. Never in my dreams as a youth would I have imagined that we have finally reached this point, give the near-century stalling of vehicle battery technology.

I remember seeing ads for early battery lawnmowers maybe 15-20 years ago but in the last five years they have really taken off. I have one from Sun-Joe for my small city lawn, my Dad with a much larger lawn has an eGo mower. He loves it and he's certainly not someone who identifies as a tree-hugger - it's powerful, does the job and is so much easier to deal with than cantankerous gas engines.

Unless you need a riding mower there's little reason to buy a gas mower these days.

 

[real mikeb_60]

You might as well ask Americans to stop being American if you're going to demand they stop driving massively oversized vehicles.

I don't expect individual Americans to make the choice. I expect policymakers to actually fucking do something about the problem.

Really? In a country where one of the only two political parties is in the process of being captured by an insane conspiracy theory that boils down to the protocols of the elders of Zion, you think we have policymakers capable of solving problems?

And the other one looks at the rest of us as either you're with us or you're against us. Two words: term limits. Get that in place, and then the process can begin on fixing all the other shit that's gone belly up since the early 90's.

Don't you dare bothsides this. And ffs, you think churning a bunch of inexperienced newbie lawmakers who never accumulate enough legislative experience to know what they're doing is the solution to the problem?

And why not display both sides as failing the American public? The vast majority of this nation's voting block is squarely in the middle with slight variations to the left, right, or true neutral in the center. Currently we have career politicians. Think about that for a moment. Being a politician should never be the sole career. And the fact that the large majority are lawyers should make everyone pause. How many of the people we elect actually represent what the rest of us do for a living? Are there any plumbers, electricians, bakers, nurses, engineers, small business owners, or any other job that props up this nation in the legislature? As far as I can see the past couple decades, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Wipe them all out including the most powerful on the left and right: Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell. Never give them enough time to consolidate into tribes.

The "bunch of inexperienced newbie lawmakers" will enter the legislature as a member of a tribe, and will not (with short term limits, anyway) develop enough knowledge and general competence to move beyond that. After all, they are locked to whichever tribe provided the money to elect them, even if they have a brain willing to look at new ideas in alternate months on 5th Tuesdays.

Short (2-3 terms) term limits are promoted by small-government types as a way to make government unworkable. I could see a longer term limit for legislators - perhaps 20 years worth - so legislators could develop some expertise about how things work and not be totally under the thumbs of their parties and the lobbyists (who don't, especially the latter, have any term limits). 20-25 years would allow them to make a reasonable career out of it, if they can convince their voters that they're doing a good enough job to stay in office. And this is FOR LEGISLATORS ONLY. 2 terms for a President is quite enough, even too much for certain individuals.

 

[McTurkey]

And why not display both sides as failing the American public? The vast majority of this nation's voting block is squarely in the middle with slight variations to the left, right, or true neutral in the center. Currently we have career politicians. Think about that for a moment. Being a politician should never be the sole career. And the fact that the large majority are lawyers should make everyone pause. How many of the people we elect actually represent what the rest of us do for a living? Are there any plumbers, electricians, bakers, nurses, engineers, small business owners, or any other job that props up this nation in the legislature? As far as I can see the past couple decades, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Wipe them all out including the most powerful on the left and right: Nancy Pelosi and Mitch McConnell. Never give them enough time to consolidate into tribes.

Referring to the situation as "both sides" is a false equivalence. Yes, there is a lot that Democrats and Republicans have in common. Their views on climate change are not among those (other than certain fringe elements like Joe Manchin of WV).

It's true that neither of the two major parties has proposed a policy sufficient for addressing climate change at the speed and size scientists want.

It's also true that one of the two parties (Republican) has actively worked to undo climate change and environmental regulation, walked away from an international treaty on climate change, and actively engages in science denialism.

Our planet does not have time to wait for perfect. Take the option that makes environmental collapse less likely, not more likely.

 

[DancesWithBikers]

So, no more LS swap everything?

 

[real mikeb_60]

However, EVs are rapidly reaching the point where if you don't live in the deep boonies they're practical.

I don't know how long these things have been out, but I saw a battery-powered lawnmower the other day at Lowes. Never in my dreams as a youth would I have imagined that we have finally reached this point, give the near-century stalling of vehicle battery technology.

I remember seeing ads for early battery lawnmowers maybe 15-20 years ago but in the last five years they have really taken off. I have one from Sun-Joe for my small city lawn, my Dad with a much larger lawn has an eGo mower. He loves it and he's certainly not someone who identifies as a tree-hugger - it's powerful, does the job and is so much easier to deal with than cantankerous gas engines.

Unless you need a riding mower there's little reason to buy a gas mower these days.

When I had a lawn, I had a drag-around-the-cord electric mower. Mainly because I didn't want to deal with the fuel and fumes of a gas mower. They generally lasted at least 10 years, and the only maintenance (other than occasionally replacing a cord that got run over) was sharpening or replacing a blade. Much quieter than the older 2-cycle beasts, too. Modern battery mowers are good enough that the main benefit of the cord (you have as much power at the end of the mowing job as at the beginning) is no longer a factor for a reasonable suburban lawn.

Of course, I went no-lawn so it's a moot point...all I need now is the weed-whacker (also electric) for occasional cleanup.

 

[SplatMan_DK]

You might as well ask Americans to stop being American if you're going to demand they stop driving massively oversized vehicles.

I don't expect individual Americans to make the choice. I expect policymakers to actually fucking do something about the problem.

Really? In a country where one of the only two political parties is in the process of being captured by an insane conspiracy theory that boils down to the protocols of the elders of Zion, you think we have policymakers capable of solving problems?

As a voice that carries weight and influences public opinion YOU also have a responsibility to drive change. A responsibility you have chosen to neglect or reject (by your own words).

It's easy to point to the evil politicians and ignore your own part in all this. But it's not the right thing to do culturally, ethically or morally.

YOU are "somebody". You can't pretend not to be, even if it's convenient.

 

[Deleted member 545801]

Is it too much to ask for an EV SSR in Banana Yellow?

 

[IntellectualThug]

Interesting. So with a basic front-drive unit (how does it differ from the Bolt unit?) and an "assist" unit, the new Bigger Bolt can be AWD. Being able to burn more kw in two motors, of course, requires a bigger battery, which requires a bigger vehicle, etc etc. The key benefit of a Bolt, besides being electric with adequate (barely) range and (reasonably) performance, is that it provides a good amount of usable space inside of a small exterior package. Yes, I know, that doesn't sell in the US which is undoubtedly why the Bigger Bolt is coming and will almost certainly replace the current model entirely. Bets that the bigger one won't have any more seating room than the current one? If they improve the comfort of the front seats, though, it'll be worthwhile (can I retrofit them?).

Why would a second motor in the Bolt "burn more kW"?

It's not like there's a huge range difference between the single and dual motor Teslas...

Energy consumption and efficiency is hugely affected by acceleration and weight.

When you build a big and heavy EV to accelerate better, customers will use it. It will increase real-world consumed energy, while laving range almost unchanged because range is calculated with carefully controlled (and often ideal) parameters.

Look, SplatMan, I know you have basically 0 understanding of American motoring culture, but let me lay this out in stark terms.

1. America is a democracy, you can't force autocratic changes on people who don't want them.

2. Americans like their BIGTRUX. Yes, it's dumb, yes it's based on their fragile egos, yes it damages the planet severely. But you aren't going to change it.

3. If you don't offer this large subset of Americans their BIGTRUX with electric motors, they simply will not adopt EVs, period. There is no yes-but to this, as badly as you may want it.

4. Electrified BIGTRUX are still a massive, gigantic, huge improvement over the literal <15mpg behemoths people use to commute to work. This especially in the capital of Truckistan, Texas, where a large and increasing amount of power is coming from wind which will gradually improve the MPGe of all BEVs while gassers remain as stubbornly thirsty as the day they were sold.

5. There is no CO2 environmental footprint increase to the actual manufacture of a vehicle when moving to BEV propulsion. This myth is tired and needs to die.

So you are wrong. Very, very wrong. And complaining that GM is making the pragmatic choice to sell a BEV the worst environmental offenders will actually buy is stupid and counterproductive.

 

[Snark218]

The environmental break-even point for the lifetime footprint of such an EV is beyond bonkers. It might well end up polluting even more than simply driving an existing ICE hummer until it dies.

It's a d*ck move by GM that proves beyond any reasonable doubt that they just don't give a damn because dollars.

Every environmental analysis I've seen for EVs shows that production is the phase responsible for most of the lifecycle carbon emissions of the vehicle. An EV's well-to-wheel efficiency is 3-4 times that of a gasser, so the operation phase of the lifecycle is where the EV pulls out significantly ahead and stays there. And that holds true for cars, buses, whatever.

A Silverado 1500 pickup the same size as this Hummer, with the optional 5.3L V8 (which is the only drivetrain in that truck even remotely comparable in output to the EV) and 4WD, emits 477g/mi of CO2. A third of that is 159g/mi. Those are carbon emissions on par with a Prius (169g/mi), significantly better than an Escape or other crossover hybrid (220g/mi). And a 2009 Hummer H3T emits something like 560g/mi. Even if we very conservatively pad that emissions rate out to 250g/mi, that's still on par with any number of conventional family cars.

Which is a long way to say, you're going to have to show your work here instead of just performing outrage. If the Hummer EV ends up polluting more than a gasser equivalent over the course of its lifecycle, it would be uniquely inefficient the EV world. And if someone wants to blow a shitload of money on a giant electric pickup which gets Prius-beating carbon emissions, I have only so many fucks, and many worse polluters to give them for.

 

[QMaverick]

As you might expect, the main focus for this third generation of electric motors has been efficiency.

So they're building a new Hummer? Really?

I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Making big, heavy and inefficient vehicles "electrical" does almost nothing for the environment.

We need a change in car culture, where the total pollution/CO2 footprint-per-mile matters. We do not need to convert a whole pile of polluting ICE vehicles to polluting EVs.

I'd much rather the emissions of an electric hummer than those of a gas powered Honda

Interesting point. Currently EVs are expensive, batteries weight a ton, cost a fortune etc. Converting popular reasonably sized econoboxes from ICE to EV is going to be a hard sell as they benefit from a literal century of price optimisations.

So ... we need to start with an existing big heavy car that sells to buyers who are pretty price insensitive, and don’t really care about performance or car weight or car price, and don’t really use it for carrying heavy loads or driving long distances ... What car comes to mind ... ?

I feel terrible and slightly ridiculous for saying this but if Hummer buyers are willing to shell out for early market EV engines and batteries, then by covering the dev costs for the rest of us that could be major help for saving the planet. Business cases have to start somewhere.

The environmental break-even point for the lifetime footprint of such an EV is beyond bonkers. It might well end up polluting even more than simply driving an existing ICE hummer until it dies.

It's a d*ck move by GM that proves beyond any reasonable doubt that they just don't give a damn because dollars.

Literally every single recent, credible study done on this subject completely disagrees with you. You're objectively wrong.

 

[McTurkey]

Battery powered lawnmowers have been around for years such as the Black and Decker CMM1000 with a lead acid battery (since early 2000s and one that I owned). Now there are many lithium ion versions on the market as well as other yard tools and all are actually being actively marketed. However all have the same problem of cars - running out of charge and time to recharge (spare batteries needed).

Electric lawn mowers do cost more up front to get enough battery capacity to avoid recharging in the middle of a mow, but after a season of using electric lawn equipment I can't imagine returning to the noise and smell of gas.

 

[ilidd]

Is it too much to ask for an EV SSR in Banana Yellow?

It’s only permitted if you get giant, Curious George vinyl decals for it.

 

[SplatMan_DK]

It's true that neither of the two major parties has proposed a policy sufficient for addressing climate change at the speed and size scientists want.

Maybe. But I was positively surprised by Bidens Plan for a Clean Energy Revolution and Environmental Justice.

I agree that it's just birds in the bush at this point. But at least the guy is tweeting the right tune. It's better than any previous tune we have heard from the US political establishment.

 

[Meldreth]

Imagine getting a paper tiger of a company to give $2billion in stock and up to $700 million to pay for your R&D and production of a product you were going to do anyway. Well done GM.

Imagine going from a vaporware truck that you roll down a hill to suddenly having viable products in exchange for your worthless stock and some cash that you bilked out of investors and pre-orders?

The deal was a win for GM, but also a lifeline for Nikola. It would have been a Theranos-like implosion for them otherwise.

But now Nikola will have to explain why all the ground breaking technology they promised investors, and that would make them unique and ahead of anyone else, is being replaced by someone else's off the shelf parts.
No incredibly cheap hydrogen, no self-sourced CNG, no batteries that pack 50% more charge in the same package - just a rebadged GM truck. Or is it a Bosch truck? What is happening there?

 

[IntellectualThug]

Imagine getting a paper tiger of a company to give $2billion in stock and up to $700 million to pay for your R&D and production of a product you were going to do anyway. Well done GM.

Imagine going from a vaporware truck that you roll down a hill to suddenly having viable products in exchange for your worthless stock and some cash that you bilked out of investors and pre-orders?

The deal was a win for GM, but also a lifeline for Nikola. It would have been a Theranos-like implosion for them otherwise.

But now Nikola will have to explain why all the ground breaking technology they promised investors, and that would make them unique and ahead of anyone else, is being replaced by someone else's off the shelf parts.
No incredibly cheap hydrogen, no self-sourced CNG, no batteries that pack 50% more charge in the same package - just a rebadged GM truck. Or is it a Bosch truck? What is happening there?

Fraud, mostly.

 

[onkeljonas]

Interesting. So with a basic front-drive unit (how does it differ from the Bolt unit?) and an "assist" unit, the new Bigger Bolt can be AWD. Being able to burn more kw in two motors, of course, requires a bigger battery, which requires a bigger vehicle, etc etc. The key benefit of a Bolt, besides being electric with adequate (barely) range and (reasonably) performance, is that it provides a good amount of usable space inside of a small exterior package. Yes, I know, that doesn't sell in the US which is undoubtedly why the Bigger Bolt is coming and will almost certainly replace the current model entirely. Bets that the bigger one won't have any more seating room than the current one? If they improve the comfort of the front seats, though, it'll be worthwhile (can I retrofit them?).

Why would a second motor in the Bolt "burn more kW"?

It's not like there's a huge range difference between the single and dual motor Teslas...

Energy consumption and efficiency is hugely affected by acceleration and weight.

When you build a big and heavy EV to accelerate better, customers will use it. It will increase real-world consumed energy, while laving range almost unchanged because range is calculated with carefully controlled (and often ideal) parameters.

Look, SplatMan, I know you have basically 0 understanding of American motoring culture, but let me lay this out in stark terms.

1. America is a democracy, you can't force autocratic changes on people who don't want them.

Nonsense in many ways. In the specific case, there's plenty of legislation regulating which cars can and can't drive on roads in the US already.

 

[calvinist]

As you might expect, the main focus for this third generation of electric motors has been efficiency.

So they're building a new Hummer? Really?

I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Making big, heavy and inefficient vehicles "electrical" does almost nothing for the environment.

We need a change in car culture, where the total pollution/CO2 footprint-per-mile matters. We do not need to convert a whole pile of polluting ICE vehicles to polluting EVs.

I'd much rather the emissions of an electric hummer than those of a gas powered Honda

That's definitely the dichotomy we should work with. ;-)

My reaction was similar to SplatMan's -- "gee I'm glad they're got their priorities in order, the Hummer is definitely the place to start".

Like it or not, with the buying habits of Americans, the Hummer is the place to start.

 

[IntellectualThug]

Interesting. So with a basic front-drive unit (how does it differ from the Bolt unit?) and an "assist" unit, the new Bigger Bolt can be AWD. Being able to burn more kw in two motors, of course, requires a bigger battery, which requires a bigger vehicle, etc etc. The key benefit of a Bolt, besides being electric with adequate (barely) range and (reasonably) performance, is that it provides a good amount of usable space inside of a small exterior package. Yes, I know, that doesn't sell in the US which is undoubtedly why the Bigger Bolt is coming and will almost certainly replace the current model entirely. Bets that the bigger one won't have any more seating room than the current one? If they improve the comfort of the front seats, though, it'll be worthwhile (can I retrofit them?).

Why would a second motor in the Bolt "burn more kW"?

It's not like there's a huge range difference between the single and dual motor Teslas...

Energy consumption and efficiency is hugely affected by acceleration and weight.

When you build a big and heavy EV to accelerate better, customers will use it. It will increase real-world consumed energy, while laving range almost unchanged because range is calculated with carefully controlled (and often ideal) parameters.

Look, SplatMan, I know you have basically 0 understanding of American motoring culture, but let me lay this out in stark terms.

1. America is a democracy, you can't force autocratic changes on people who don't want them.

Nonsense in many ways. In the specific case, there's plenty of legislation regulating which cars can and can't drive on roads in the US already.

And the majority of people want those regulations, because it makes everyone safer and healthier. What kind of stupid fucking rebuttal is that?

 

[MMarsh]

As you might expect, the main focus for this third generation of electric motors has been efficiency.

So they're building a new Hummer? Really?

I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Making big, heavy and inefficient vehicles "electrical" does almost nothing for the environment.

We need a change in car culture, where the total pollution/CO2 footprint-per-mile matters. We do not need to convert a whole pile of polluting ICE vehicles to polluting EVs.

I'd much rather the emissions of an electric hummer than those of a gas powered Honda

Interesting point. Currently EVs are expensive, batteries weight a ton, cost a fortune etc. Converting popular reasonably sized econoboxes from ICE to EV is going to be a hard sell as they benefit from a literal century of price optimisations.

So ... we need to start with an existing big heavy car that sells to buyers who are pretty price insensitive, and don’t really care about performance or car weight or car price, and don’t really use it for carrying heavy loads or driving long distances ... What car comes to mind ... ?

I feel terrible and slightly ridiculous for saying this but if Hummer buyers are willing to shell out for early market EV engines and batteries, then by covering the dev costs for the rest of us that could be major help for saving the planet. Business cases have to start somewhere.

The environmental break-even point for the lifetime footprint of such an EV is beyond bonkers. It might well end up polluting even more than simply driving an existing ICE hummer until it dies.

It's a d*ck move by GM that proves beyond any reasonable doubt that they just don't give a damn because dollars.

A gas-powered Hummer H2 would have burned about 52 tonnes of fuel and released 159 tonnes of CO2 during the roughly 300,000 km between leaving the factory and entering the scrap crusher.

Electrify that, make its overall efficiency 0.4 kWh/km (~2x worse than a Tesla Model X), and it'll use about 120 MWh over that same distance. Even if you're running the whole grid on the dirtiest out-of-date coal plants to be found in the US, that's 120 tonnes of CO2, a 39 tonne savings over the gas version. The embodied energy / manufacturing CO2 content of the battery is way less than that.

Now try realistic numbers representative of the actual car and American power grid. Say 0.3 kWh/km and 0.45 kgCO2/kWh. 40.5 tonnes CO2 lifetime operating emissions.

Large, heavy vehicles that rarely see intensive long-distance or towing duty are the easiest low-hanging fruit you can get for electrification.

 

[real mikeb_60]

So, no more LS swap everything?

Maybe they can name the crate motor the "LS-e" so we can keep doing those swaps?

 

[CraigJ ✅]

However, EVs are rapidly reaching the point where if you don't live in the deep boonies they're practical.

I don't know how long these things have been out, but I saw a battery-powered lawnmower the other day at Lowes. Never in my dreams as a youth would I have imagined that we have finally reached this point, give the near-century stalling of vehicle battery technology.

I remember seeing ads for early battery lawnmowers maybe 15-20 years ago but in the last five years they have really taken off. I have one from Sun-Joe for my small city lawn, my Dad with a much larger lawn has an eGo mower. He loves it and he's certainly not someone who identifies as a tree-hugger - it's powerful, does the job and is so much easier to deal with than cantankerous gas engines.

Unless you need a riding mower there's little reason to buy a gas mower these days.

When I had a lawn, I had a drag-around-the-cord electric mower. Mainly because I didn't want to deal with the fuel and fumes of a gas mower. They generally lasted at least 10 years, and the only maintenance (other than occasionally replacing a cord that got run over) was sharpening or replacing a blade. Much quieter than the older 2-cycle beasts, too. Modern battery mowers are good enough that the main benefit of the cord (you have as much power at the end of the mowing job as at the beginning) is no longer a factor for a reasonable suburban lawn.

Of course, I went no-lawn so it's a moot point...all I need now is the weed-whacker (also electric) for occasional cleanup.

Weed whacker? Pffft.

 

[Snark218]

You might as well ask Americans to stop being American if you're going to demand they stop driving massively oversized vehicles.

I don't expect individual Americans to make the choice. I expect policymakers to actually fucking do something about the problem.

Really? In a country where one of the only two political parties is in the process of being captured by an insane conspiracy theory that boils down to the protocols of the elders of Zion, you think we have policymakers capable of solving problems?

As a voice that carries weight and influences public opinion YOU also have a responsibility to drive change. A responsibility you have chosen to neglect or reject (by your own words).

It's easy to point to the evil politicians and ignore your own part in all this. But it's not the right thing to do culturally, ethically or morally.

YOU are "somebody". You can't pretend not to be, even if it's convenient.

This whole routine where you just stoke yourself to a giant rage-boner and act like a sanctimonious prick in any thread about a car that isn't the size of a Reliant Robin is so unutterably fucking tiresome. Gitlin might as well advocate a wholesale national transition to magical carriages drawn by My Little Ponies farting the aroma of a fresh bag of gummy worms, so failing to write angry climatology fanfiction is hardly an ethical, moral, or cultural failure. It's just an understanding that any such idea is not moving forward in American culture anytime soon, and that wasting words talking about it is a waste of time.

Particularly when this one can be reasonably expected to have carbon emissions rate of a Prius, which makes it, and his discussion of it in this article, Not The Fucking Problem.

And if that rage-boner lasts more than three hours, go see your doctor. I hope to god it's a long wait.

 

[bman212121]

So, no more LS swap everything?

I'm sure LS swaps will still be common because it's the closest thing to a bolt in modification for a lot of the swapped vehicles, and the market around LS engines is huge. Popularity is basically a self sustaining model, because it's popular that means is well documented, and whatever issues you might run into someone already has created a solution for.

That said for the people who do a lot of swaps it seems like LS is fairly played out at this point, and it's almost considered boring to put an LS into a car. If GM does in fact make crate versions of these electric motors, then we could see an entirely new market pop up around them to make the swaps easier / cheaper which means they will become more mainstream. If that happens then I'd expect LS swaps to go down considerably. Right now though the average person isn't going to be making these types of swaps because it will likely require a lot of fabrication and trial / error to make it work.

 

[Snark218]

Interesting. So with a basic front-drive unit (how does it differ from the Bolt unit?) and an "assist" unit, the new Bigger Bolt can be AWD. Being able to burn more kw in two motors, of course, requires a bigger battery, which requires a bigger vehicle, etc etc. The key benefit of a Bolt, besides being electric with adequate (barely) range and (reasonably) performance, is that it provides a good amount of usable space inside of a small exterior package. Yes, I know, that doesn't sell in the US which is undoubtedly why the Bigger Bolt is coming and will almost certainly replace the current model entirely. Bets that the bigger one won't have any more seating room than the current one? If they improve the comfort of the front seats, though, it'll be worthwhile (can I retrofit them?).

Why would a second motor in the Bolt "burn more kW"?

It's not like there's a huge range difference between the single and dual motor Teslas...

Energy consumption and efficiency is hugely affected by acceleration and weight.

When you build a big and heavy EV to accelerate better, customers will use it. It will increase real-world consumed energy, while laving range almost unchanged because range is calculated with carefully controlled (and often ideal) parameters.

Look, SplatMan, I know you have basically 0 understanding of American motoring culture, but let me lay this out in stark terms.

1. America is a democracy, you can't force autocratic changes on people who don't want them.

Nonsense in many ways. In the specific case, there's plenty of legislation regulating which cars can and can't drive on roads in the US already.

Passed by legislators, who are elected by voters. Please cut the shit.

 

[Statistical]

Interesting. So with a basic front-drive unit (how does it differ from the Bolt unit?) and an "assist" unit, the new Bigger Bolt can be AWD. Being able to burn more kw in two motors, of course, requires a bigger battery, which requires a bigger vehicle, etc etc. The key benefit of a Bolt, besides being electric with adequate (barely) range and (reasonably) performance, is that it provides a good amount of usable space inside of a small exterior package. Yes, I know, that doesn't sell in the US which is undoubtedly why the Bigger Bolt is coming and will almost certainly replace the current model entirely. Bets that the bigger one won't have any more seating room than the current one? If they improve the comfort of the front seats, though, it'll be worthwhile (can I retrofit them?).

Why would a second motor in the Bolt "burn more kW"?

It's not like there's a huge range difference between the single and dual motor Teslas...

I have a 200hp motor in a small Bolt. I add 100hp in the back of a larger Bolt that's heavier (in part the bigger battery). I use more power than the basic Bolt because it's bigger and heavier (and more fun, being AWD). I need the bigger battery to feed both motors and still get 250+ miles range. Of course, the maximum power of the current drivetrain is seldom used, as is true of most non-racing vehicles, which is why it averages 4 mi/kwh (competitive with Tesla). Bigger, heavier, and more power, though, will inevitably require more battery (perhaps not linearly more) to service it.

Going to the limit, I really doubt the full-size EV pickups will even break 3 miles/kwh by much; the big Europeans (SUVs) are mostly in the 2's or low 3's. A EV pickup is a different use case than a Long Range Model 3 or S, and can tolerate higher energy consumption as long as the range is reasonable.

I think the bigger battery argument holds because of the bigger vehicle.

But by itself, a 2-motor vehicle doesn't require a bigger battery.

Example:
Tesla Model S 75: 249 mi range
Tesla Model S 75 259 mi range

If we suppose the total power output stays the same, but it's worth noting that most times a dual-motor setup is done for more power output, which usually means a bigger battery is needed to support that discharge rate.

The Model S 75D had more power AND higher efficiency than the 70. 386 kW vs 285 kW.

Having dual motors allows you to gear them differently. When less than peak output is needed you can shift from mostly using one motor at low speed to mostly using the other motor at high speed. That keeps the motors close to ideal efficiency.

Yes with BEV you can get more power and better "fuel" economy.

 

[numerobis]

However, EVs are rapidly reaching the point where if you don't live in the deep boonies they're practical.

I don't know how long these things have been out, but I saw a battery-powered lawnmower the other day at Lowes. Never in my dreams as a youth would I have imagined that we have finally reached this point, give the near-century stalling of vehicle battery technology.

I remember seeing ads for early battery lawnmowers maybe 15-20 years ago but in the last five years they have really taken off. I have one from Sun-Joe for my small city lawn, my Dad with a much larger lawn has an eGo mower. He loves it and he's certainly not someone who identifies as a tree-hugger - it's powerful, does the job and is so much easier to deal with than cantankerous gas engines.

Unless you need a riding mower there's little reason to buy a gas mower these days.

I can't think of much more terrifying than flying lawnmowers.

 

[IntellectualThug]

Interesting. So with a basic front-drive unit (how does it differ from the Bolt unit?) and an "assist" unit, the new Bigger Bolt can be AWD. Being able to burn more kw in two motors, of course, requires a bigger battery, which requires a bigger vehicle, etc etc. The key benefit of a Bolt, besides being electric with adequate (barely) range and (reasonably) performance, is that it provides a good amount of usable space inside of a small exterior package. Yes, I know, that doesn't sell in the US which is undoubtedly why the Bigger Bolt is coming and will almost certainly replace the current model entirely. Bets that the bigger one won't have any more seating room than the current one? If they improve the comfort of the front seats, though, it'll be worthwhile (can I retrofit them?).

Why would a second motor in the Bolt "burn more kW"?

It's not like there's a huge range difference between the single and dual motor Teslas...

I have a 200hp motor in a small Bolt. I add 100hp in the back of a larger Bolt that's heavier (in part the bigger battery). I use more power than the basic Bolt because it's bigger and heavier (and more fun, being AWD). I need the bigger battery to feed both motors and still get 250+ miles range. Of course, the maximum power of the current drivetrain is seldom used, as is true of most non-racing vehicles, which is why it averages 4 mi/kwh (competitive with Tesla). Bigger, heavier, and more power, though, will inevitably require more battery (perhaps not linearly more) to service it.

Going to the limit, I really doubt the full-size EV pickups will even break 3 miles/kwh by much; the big Europeans (SUVs) are mostly in the 2's or low 3's. A EV pickup is a different use case than a Long Range Model 3 or S, and can tolerate higher energy consumption as long as the range is reasonable.

I think the bigger battery argument holds because of the bigger vehicle.

But by itself, a 2-motor vehicle doesn't require a bigger battery.

Example:
Tesla Model S 75: 249 mi range
Tesla Model S 75 259 mi range

If we suppose the total power output stays the same, but it's worth noting that most times a dual-motor setup is done for more power output, which usually means a bigger battery is needed to support that discharge rate.

The Model S 75D had more power AND higher efficiency than the 70. 386 kW vs 285 kW.

Having dual motors allows you to gear them differently. When less than peak output is needed you can shift from mostly using one motor at low speed to mostly using the other motor at high speed. That keeps the motors close to ideal efficiency.

Yes with BEV you can get more power and better "fuel" economy.

I was talking more about the general trend of more power=bigger battery, not the specific case of one particular trim of Tesla versus another. There is no replacement for displacement, so to speak.

 

[calvinist]

However, EVs are rapidly reaching the point where if you don't live in the deep boonies they're practical.

I don't know how long these things have been out, but I saw a battery-powered lawnmower the other day at Lowes. Never in my dreams as a youth would I have imagined that we have finally reached this point, give the near-century stalling of vehicle battery technology.

I remember seeing ads for early battery lawnmowers maybe 15-20 years ago but in the last five years they have really taken off. I have one from Sun-Joe for my small city lawn, my Dad with a much larger lawn has an eGo mower. He loves it and he's certainly not someone who identifies as a tree-hugger - it's powerful, does the job and is so much easier to deal with than cantankerous gas engines.

Unless you need a riding mower there's little reason to buy a gas mower these days.

When I had a lawn, I had a drag-around-the-cord electric mower. Mainly because I didn't want to deal with the fuel and fumes of a gas mower. They generally lasted at least 10 years, and the only maintenance (other than occasionally replacing a cord that got run over) was sharpening or replacing a blade. Much quieter than the older 2-cycle beasts, too. Modern battery mowers are good enough that the main benefit of the cord (you have as much power at the end of the mowing job as at the beginning) is no longer a factor for a reasonable suburban lawn.

Of course, I went no-lawn so it's a moot point...all I need now is the weed-whacker (also electric) for occasional cleanup.

Weed whacker? Pffft.

Actually, that torch probably produces few emissions than your typical lawn mower.

 

[jhciv]

Honestly, GM has been ahead of the engineering curve for EVs for a looooong time (EV1 to now). They just haven't had the leadership or marketing guts to package and sell them.

I test drove a Volt gen 2 to try and keep me from going through with my (much more expensive) Tesla Model 3 reservation. Didn't do it because the Volt felt cramped inside and I wanted full electric+superchargers. But the Volt's electric powertrain was great! Then they had the Bolt, which ditched its hot-hatch concept looks for tiny-minivan looks. And named it after a cartoon dog that was confusingly similar to their unrelated existing model.

C'mon GM, let's nail it this time.

 

[IntellectualThug]

However, EVs are rapidly reaching the point where if you don't live in the deep boonies they're practical.

I don't know how long these things have been out, but I saw a battery-powered lawnmower the other day at Lowes. Never in my dreams as a youth would I have imagined that we have finally reached this point, give the near-century stalling of vehicle battery technology.

I remember seeing ads for early battery lawnmowers maybe 15-20 years ago but in the last five years they have really taken off. I have one from Sun-Joe for my small city lawn, my Dad with a much larger lawn has an eGo mower. He loves it and he's certainly not someone who identifies as a tree-hugger - it's powerful, does the job and is so much easier to deal with than cantankerous gas engines.

Unless you need a riding mower there's little reason to buy a gas mower these days.

I can't think of much more terrifying than flying lawnmowers.

Better not look up hover mowers, then.

 

[sonolumi]

A fascinating read. I found the thickness of the copper in the stators surprising, but then the coils of electric motors I'm used to seeing (RC models) aren't designed for kWs of power.

It also answered a question I had been wondering about traditional car makers moving into electric motors. Namely where them moving outside of their engineering knowledge. It's nice to hear Kwiatkowski saying that combustion engine design gave him a strong foundation to build electric motors.

There will be new challenges as BEV development evolves. Apart from battery energy density and longevity, which always seems to be at the forefront of improvements, I wonder what other advancements in the drive train we will see. Interesting times.