Chevy bolt is priced at 43-48k in NH and looks like a mini garbage truck in comparison to a T3.
Lane keeping is not a safety feature. TACC is not a safety feature. Those, as you very well know, are convenience features, as they are on every other car that offers them. I find it hard to believe anyone in the auto industry could be this obtuse so it's clear you are just a liar.
Cars are WORTH what customers are willing to pay. I contend that even without the tax credit, Tesla cars are still WORTH what the price tag says. Add to that - Tesla owners realize that they are funding future products (like the model 3, and EAP) and WANT tesla to profit from their cars so they can reinvest in R and D. Quite different from your GM.
I also contend that without the tax credit, and inevitable "deals" offered from manufacturers, GM would not be able to get 35K and up for the Bolt. The price for most if not all other EV, BEV and PHEVs that are available are overinflated for what they are.
I'm ready to pay 35K for the Model 3 without the tax credit if I have to.
@mp1156 "Cars are WORTH what customers are willing to pay."
Which is why Tesla, GM, Ford, Federal government, economists all state that the $7,500 Federal Subsidy for EV's increases sales and profits for EV mfg.s.
Tesla and GM both state price of car after $7,500 tax credit.
Tesla has stated their price before credit at $35,000.
The fact that you get $4500 in California and Colorado is only gravy.
We should probably extend the tax credits and increase them as they are effective in accelerating the transition to renewable transportation.
No tolls. Free ferries. Free Supercharging. No VAT tax.
If we do that in the U.S. we'd see a transformation to sustainable transportation.
Especially coupled with the Tesla Network which will allow Self Driving and a single Tesla car doing the work of 10-20 cars.
That generally pushes down demand for new cars, but the cost of 0 driver and (near) 0 fuel costs means self driving EVs are singularly positioned to reduced the cost per mile, thereby increasing demand for fleets and reducing private ownership.
Tesla is the only car company ready to give every person in the world an app and the ability to summon a fleet of cars, charging and service.
See Australia. Virtually no incentives of any kind for BEVs, regardless of which state you live in. The sole "incentive" I get for being a BEV owner in NSW is that the vehicle tax increase a few years ago was not applied to certain fuel efficient vehicles, creating on ongoing delta. The size of that "incentive"? A grand total of $45 per year. There are no toll exemptions, no bus lane exemptions, no parking exemptions etc. We do it the hard way here.
So while EV tax credits seem to be a source of endless fascination in the USA, it's irrelevant for a lot of the rest of the world, where Tesla has to compete dollar-for-dollar with every other car on the market.
@jsimpsonalaska "I'm ready to pay 35K for the Model 3 without the tax credit if I have to."
I'm ready to pay $58,200 ($57,200 subtracting the $1,000 paid deposit) for the T3 without tax credit if I have to...and if I can afford it in 2018.
If not then Bolt, Volt (if they add power seats by 2019 when my number should get called), Ford Energi's plug-in's would be next in line. Most manufacturers would have to have their plug-ins in the works and starting production in 2018. Be interesting to see what is available in the two years it will take Tesla to get around to my reservation.
@bj "So while EV tax credits seem to be a source of endless fascination in the USA"
Yes...$7,500 does provide a lot of fascination. It is an example of good government policy as was the $500M loan to Tesla by the US government.
The agonizing slow build up and adoption of sustainable energy cars needs to be greatly accelerated and only government policy will do that via tax credits, pollution regs, infrastructure build out etc.
I'm reminded of a particular U.S. Presidential candidate…
I wish the tax credit system worked differently. It seems ridiculous to give a rich person (someone purchasing a $100,000 car) a tax credit, whereas by the time my $35,000 car is available for sale there might not be any credits left.
gregcropper, on one hand I can see your point, but at the same time anyone living in an apartment would be rightly upset that a homeowner can reduce their taxes through credits for buying modern appliances or energy efficient windows, etc.
@gregcopper I get what you're saying - and I do hope the tax credit is extended. that said, the model 3 would not be possible without the Model S (and X), and before the S and X no automaker had even tried to produce an EV with enough range to make mass adoption even a possibility.
gregcropper: Others have argued that it 'makes no sense' to offer a 25% incentive on a $30,000 car just because it didn't use gasoline. There will be those who complain about and misrepresent the intention of and scope of incentives and rebates and refunds regarding EVs as long as there is breath for them to draw upon to spew their lies.
@gregcropper "It seems ridiculous to give a rich person (someone purchasing a $100,000 car) a tax credit, whereas by the time my $35,000 car is available for sale there might not be any credits left."
The EV tax credit applies to all EV's not just expensive Teslas. All EV's are fairly expensive so arguing the credit just applies to upper income applies to all EV's due to the high cost and higher income demographic that buys them.
It's a fact we accept because of the need to build out the sustainable transportation system that EV's can provide.
@mp1146. You're right, but I wish the tax credit would last until EVs are cheaper to buy than ICE cars.
gregcropper: If General Motors were to build their own Gigafactory, to accompany the launch of the Chevrolet BOLT, and targeting 200,000 units or more of annual Production for US sales-- then its base price would likely be somewhere below $25,000. If the car was also compatible with the Supercharger network, that would make it significantly less expensive to own and operate than a Honda FIT. The problem is, none of that is going to happen. EVER.
@gregcropper - you should look at it another way. The fact that rich people bought the Roadster, S and X is what has made it possible for you to buy an EV for $35k at all. If it wasn't for them taking the risk, and giving Tesla the cash flow, you'd be looking at your next ICE instead of EV. Any EV which did exist would have a delta cost more than the $7.5k tax credit you fear on missing out on.
It is the early adopters who make it possible for the later adopters. Never forget that.
I console myself with the tax break I'll receive by never purchasing gasoline again. The federal gasoline tax is about $0.18 per gallon with states adding up to $.50 per gallon to that. For me that will work out to about $400 a year.
Also, don't be surprise if the Fed gas tax doesn't go up. Many people don't realize that the Fed gas tax has not gone up since 1993. So, and not to bring politics into this, but both Trump and Clinton at least publicly say they will invest in our country's failing infrastructure. Well to fund that, don't be surprised as I said, that the fed gas tax actually get adjusted for inflation since 1993.
As for giving any incentives to EV purchase helping with "sustainable transport", that can and is debated. What can't be debated if the pollution of ICE vehicles. As Jay Leno pointed out, look at the smog levels in LA today versus the 70's and there are far more cars on the road today.
@EaglesPDX, Quote: "It was paid to their customers to buy their product, $7,500 of profit paid for by tax payers. [...] But it is simply dishonest to claim a direct payment that reduces one's product cost by $7,500 is not direct subsidy of Tesla."
Since you claim this broadly, it only takes one counterexample to prove you wrong. It really does come down to two cases. If someone WOULD NOT have bought the product unless they had the tax credit, then Tesla is making the sale because of the tax credit, and your point may be valid. But if a person WOULD HAVE bought the product anyway, regardless of the tax credit, then your point is wrong (speaking of "simply dishonest"), and there are plenty of cases of this.
@bj gave you one example (no tax credit in Australia), but there are many more. I was waiting for the first 200+ mile electric car to exist, so we would have bought it with or without the tax credit. Other people don't qualify for the tax credit for various reasons. The cars bought all give the same money to Tesla whether or not the buyer gets a tax credit or not. Neither of those affects how much money goes to Tesla.
I also tried explaining this to you with insulation. Maybe insulation is being bought for regular new building construction (no tax deduction), or maybe it's being bought by a homeowner to add more insulation which qualifies for the energy efficiency tax benefit. These two types of purchases are identical to the insulation maker. They get the same amount of money either way.
Rocky_H: +42 Gozillion Googol!
Well said, Rocky H. I'm fed up with people crabbing about Tesla getting tax subsidies, when in fact GM gets far more tax money than Tesla could ever dream. Tesla doesn't get those tax credits, the customers do, as they should.
Having said that, GM still owes the US taxpayers 11 billion for a bailout that they will never pay back. And their customers get the same tax credits for purchasing EVs that Tesla's customers do.
To put into perspective the $11B gift to GM Gregchopper mentioned, that could cover the price of +314,000 base $35,000 Model ☰s - nearly one for every reservation Tesla has for the Model ☰! Or, it could have funded an additional 1,466,666 EV $7,500 tax credits.
But instead the "too big to fail" has done what with it? invested in LG for them to develop the Bolt? I've seen a lot of Chevy dealerships remodeled around here too, so I suppose some of that cash made it's way to local contractors & construction suppliers.
@RockyH "Since you claim this broadly, it only takes one counterexample to prove you wrong. It really does come down to two cases. "
All economists and certainly all the car mfg;'s view the $7,500 tax payment as way for car mfgs to sell more cars and make more profits. Your odd quid pro quo above is meaningless to the economists and the car mfgs.
Rather than some self invented anecdote, see you if you can find and economist who does not consider the government subside as a sales and profit boost for the car companies.
Luckily, General Motors should be able to qualify for the $15,000,000,000 or so that is left in the Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing (ATVM) loans fund, should they decide to actually begin manufacturing electric vehicles in earnest.
@E sed: "All economists and certainly all the car mfg;'s view the $7,500 tax payment as way for car mfgs to sell more cars and make more profits"
Citation needed. That's a mighty broad and comprehensive statement of fact, and I'll give you the benefit of the doubt for the moment and believe that you have a good source for it. I'd just like to share in it...
@EaglesPDX, Quote: "All economists and certainly all the car mfg;'s view the $7,500 tax payment as way for car mfgs to sell more cars and make more profits. Your odd quid pro quo above is meaningless to the economists and the car mfgs."
That's very generous of you to speak on behalf of the car manufacturers, but how about we let them speak for themselves.
"I hope you don't buy it because every time I sell one it costs me $14,000," he said to the audience at the Brookings Institution about the 500e. "I'm honest enough to tell you that."
If the customer tax credit was so great to "sell more cars and make more profits", they probably would be making a lot more of them to take advantage of that, right? Instead, they are avoiding like the plague building and selling them. They are doing as little as they can, not making good attractive electric cars, and losing money on them, despite the tax credit. But with the same credit situation, Tesla, with a much more expensive product, is selling in much greater numbers. Supply and demand would seem to say the opposite--that the higher priced product should have a smaller market and sell less. So it seems the tax credit isn't really what's driving sales.
If a competitor's product that costs over $60,000 to start, and just over $100,000 on average, is outselling your vehicle that has a base price under $40,000 then there must be something wrong -- with either your product or your sales method, if not both.
@Eagles - "... view the $7,500 tax payment as way for car mfgs to sell more cars and make more profits"
Of course they do, stop being obtuse. Unless they are losing money on each vehicle then the more they sell the more profit they make. And yes, of course there are people out there that are more inclined to buy the vehicles because of the potential tax credit. Let's see what happens next year when both companies have reached the 200,000 threshold. Which is more likely Tesla lowering its prices or Chevy lowering theirs?
I'm actually looking forward to when that tax credit is done so people won't have that excuse.
The Tesla haters will really be scrambling then, dazed and confused, trying to work out why Tesla is still in business, dammit, and growing at a rate of knots making huge sales around the world. They'll find something else to latch on to, admitting defeat is not their strong point.
@dsvick "@Eagles - "... view the $7,500 tax payment as way for car mfgs to sell more cars and make more profits"
Of course they do, stop being obtuse."
Chuckle....I thought you were being obtuse in denying that the $7,500 Federal EV tax credit benefits Tesla sales and profit.
On the Bolt Price, while the original posted noted $48K for the top model Bolt, it looks like Car and Driver might be right with the $42K price for the top model Bolt (adding safety features like autobraking, lane keeping, cross track and blind side indicators, dynamic cruise.
That makes the loaded Bolt $35K after Federal Tax of $7,500.
Sure if you want a 42K Dolt without the important safety features like auto braking. And GM fanboy still trying to push the next GM death trap.
Loaded Dolt 48K without convenience features like auto braking. Add that option package and you're well over 50K.
Still wouldn't feel very safe.
@jsimpsonalasaka "Sure if you want a 42K Bolt without the important safety features like auto braking. And GM fanboy still trying to push the next GM death trap."
The basic Bolt is $30K (after Federal Tax credit). The loaded Bolt with 360 surround viewer in the mirror, the autobraking, dynamic cruise, lane keeping, crosstracka and blind side indicators would be $35K,using the Car and Driver list price for loaded Bolt at $42K less $7,500 tax credit.
With snows and FWD, Apple Car Play and 238 miles plus the 90 mile/30 minute fast charge, the Bolt would be a fun car and very utilitarian.
I'd have to get a test drive up to Hood and back to feel safe enough to buy one,
Car and Driver - the mag that promoted the worst car I ever owned 1982 Chevy Cavelier.
$42K before tax credit since not everyone will see it , and without those convenience features like auto braking unless you buy the optional upgrade on the Dolt. So a minimum of 45K to get the same safety features in the 35K Model 3.
Eagles - Yes, Bolt will be 30k for base, but then add that $750 if you want to travel either coast stopping for an hour every two hours at freeway speed. If you live in the mid-west you won't get one anytime soon and if you want to visit the mid-west, you will need your dino-fuel mobile.
I would like to visit my parents in OKC for their anniversary in August of 2018. I am in California and reserved a Model ≡ on 3/31. Which BEV should I buy that will ensure I can get there without having to stop for the night after driving only two hours? Where can I find DC fast charge stations that are being planned?
This is a Tesla forum, so of course people here would prefer a Tesla. Many people here also find it humorous that Chevy wants to compare their little hatch back utili-box with a premium brand vehicle. I am not saying a base Model ≡ will have luxury appointments, just saying that the brand and features offered are on a completely different level. A base Model ≡ with Supercharging will cost about $30k as well, after Federal credit, so why would Tesla fans choose a vehicle they might get before July of 2017, if any are available for sale and are not used as Lyft fleet vehicles or is not sold in their state, and it can't drive across country, doesn't have multiple options and configurations, doesn't have future level 4 or 5 autonomy hardware, can't be updated over the air and is the first full long-ish range BEV the manufacturer has made?
@Octaondd "This is a Tesla forum, so of course people here would prefer a Tesla. Many people here also find it humorous that Chevy wants to compare their little hatch back utili-box with a premium brand vehicle."
But it was people here who started the many threads on the Bolt with the theme of "Stop the Bolt". They are afraid the Bolt is going to steal T3 customers so they make crazy claims about the Bolt to the point of attacking EV's and Tesla's own mission statement of making converting US and world to EV's and transportation system based on sustainable energy.
Hopefully the Bolt will take the place of the Volt as the No. 2 plug-in EV sold in the US. To meet Tesla's mission statement which is a strategic goal for US economy and environment as well, we need to mfg and sell 18,000,000 EV's.
No doubt started to counter the absurd claims of a GM fanboy on this forum that likes to spread opinions as fact.
@jsimpsonalaska "No doubt started to counter the absurd claims of a GM fanboy on this forum that likes to spread opinions as fact."
Once again facts prove you wrong. All the Bolt threads were started by Teslerati who have instant fear and loathing of any other plug-in and view everything as a threat to Tesla. We had another start just today talking about "Tesla Killer" Bolt...sheesh.
And yet you keep spreading misinformation to build up the Dolt.
@jsimpsonalaska "And yet you keep spreading misinformation to build up the Dolt."
I don't think my posts give you a build up at all. See above.
@jsimpsonalaska, just ignore him/her (?). Nothing you or any of us say is going to make a difference.
@jordanrichard. You're probably right. Hopefully he doesn't steer someone towards the next Chevy death trap because of the misinformation he spews on this forum.
Meanwhile we can wait patiently for our configuration date to arrive. I reserved the first day, so should get mine pretty quickly even if I don't load it up.
All he is regurgitating is the same old stuff and as I and others have mentioned, people buy a car really based on a company's reputation.
Tesla has quickly and rightly become the leader in EVs. If someone wants an EV, they know where to go. GM's long standing reputation is clearly not centered on EVs. GM's history of EVs is really just one car and they crushed the shit out of them.
@jordanrichard " GM's long standing reputation is clearly not centered on EVs"
GM reached 100,000 plug-ins sold long before Tesla did...does that make GM "the leader in EV's"? Volt and Bolt are nice plug-ins as are Fords Fusion and C-MAX and pretty much sell as many as Tesla per year. US public is just not that crazy about EV's or spending more money for EV's, you can't blame GM and Ford for that.
As long as GM continues to manufacture ICE vehicles, their efforts to make EVs will be half-a$$ed at best. In fact, since the powertrain, batteries, and all the electronic components of the Bolt are actually made by LG, GM can't even claim to be half-a$$ed.
If GM can't figure out how to make a decent electric car (as opposed to buying one from LG and slapping a chevy logon on) then I can't imagine it will be long before they go bankrupt AGAIN.
@gregcropper "f GM can't figure out how to make a decent electric car."
Judging by the "Stop the Bolt" threads here on Tesla's forums, it looks like more than a few Teslerati fear the Bolt as so decent as to be a competitor for the T3.
As for the "evil" LG, they were Tesla's battery supplier to get Tesla off the ground and Tesla and LG are partners on the $25K Tesla Roadster upgrade. And LG stepped in when Tesla checked out of making the Powerwall home battery systems.