12 ms·
GM recalling nearly 69,000 Bolt EVs for fire risks
- sokoloff 6y agoGiven GM's history with the EV1, I'm not sure if I'd be returning my car to the dealer to have this recall applied: "software that will limit vehicle charging to 90% of full capacity to mitigate the risk while GM works to determine the appropriate final repair."
- javagram 6y agoGiven 20 years difference and the known reasons why the EV1 leases were ended on time, it doesn’t really seem relevant to compare to Bolts that have been sold to customers.
- nickik 6y agoThe known reason being GM didn't want to invest in next generation technology? Or what are the 'known reasons'?
- javagram 6y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1#Cancellation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_EV1#Cancellatio... > In late 2003, General Motors, then led by CEO Rick Wagoner, officially canceled the EV1 program.[11][46] GM stated that it could not sell enough of the cars to make the EV1 profitable.[47] In addition, the cost of maintaining a parts supply and service infrastructure for the 15-year minimum required by the state of California meant that existing leases would not be renewed, and all the cars would have to be returned to GM's possession. Obviously, market conditions 20 years later are very, very different and with increasing government mandates for zero emissions car sales, maintaining and improving on sales of their EVs is a key component of GM’s future in a way that it couldn’t have been in 2001. Edit: also, to point out this article is about 69,000 Bolt EVs - only about 1000 EV1s were ever produced. The difference in scale and investment is massive.
- perardi 6y agoGM is leaning heavily into electric. This is not the 90s. They are not going to scrap your car.
- b0tzzzzzzman 6y agoIf it requires cellular updates to prevent starting on fire is the term your car applicable? I would never buy one of these new botnet cars.
- perardi 6y agoWell…wait, how is that different than having a non-botnet car with a serious defect? Say, all those cars with defective Takata airbags. I guess you’re arguing that you feel safer that the manufacturer can’t remotely disable the car, but I don’t see how how a cell connection has much to do with a car having a deadly issue or not. It has to get fixed no matter what. (Also, given how many cars are leased, and the increasingly long time of those leases…lots of people, in fact, do not own their cars.)
- b0tzzzzzzman 6y agoNon botnet cars have a limited amount of slack in the rope left. Fact is most cars now require propriety expensive systems just to "repair" More so it is about how software in cars is pushed out to remedy bad design and engineering in the first place. Idealistic I suppose, but what power exist on the consumers side? How much of a reach is to say modern design and engineering has turned into a cat a mouse game. One in which we should seriously consider how deeply cancerous the lack of ownership on vehicles is. Before accepting it for common place we should look at the way our incentives have been shaped by the manufacturer. Now, a vehicle could start on fire somewhere parked without access to the update for N reasons and they just need to prove the update was prevented by the owner and the result is also therefore attributable. We can't get cell phone companies to update alot of phones past a year or so. How is GM going todo? Constantly
- soheil 6y agoI wonder how Cruise Automation is affected by having their self-driving tech running on the Bolt platform.
- SheinhardtWigCo 6y agoProbably not much: > GM said it has developed software that will limit vehicle charging to 90% of full capacity to mitigate the risk while GM works to determine the appropriate final repair.
- spullara 6y agoHuh. I only charge my Tesla to 100% a few times a year.
- fma 6y agoI'm not sure if Bolts have Over The Air updates? It mentions dealers...I know some GM cars have or will have...just not sure the older Bolts. So a consumer would need to personally ensure they don't charge to 90%, or bring it back to the dealership twice.
- fmpwizard 6y agoThe bolt has over the air update capabilities, but iirc, it was used only once in the past 4 years. And the bolt has an option to limit charge to X%. I set mine to about 80%, and it's plenty for my needs. So you can leave your car plugged in all day long
- rconti 6y agoI would guess they don't charge over 90% anyway. I've only charged our 3 to 100% 5 or 10 times over 2.5 years. And I don't leave it sitting that way.
- latortuga 6y agoI've been shopping for a Bolt on and off for a couple months and you'd be surprised! I see folks all the time that say some dismissive equivalent of "oh it's a lease, I just charge to 100% every day". Not charging to full capacity will either become car knowledge that everyone learns in drivers ed or manufacturers will end up blocking off some percentage in software to prevent full charges.
- bfieidhbrjr 6y agoSounds like a software update. Maybe putting wifi and remote updating in the first place was the cheaper/better idea after all.
- fma 6y agoGM cars don't need wifi. GM pioneered the connected car via cellular modems through their OnStar program since 1996... Question is how much of your vehicle software do you expose.
- vvanders 6y ago> Dealerships will update the vehicle’s battery software beginning next week. Sound like you get to drive it in to the dealership anyway. If I remember correctly some of the dealership agreements mandate that the dealer handles software updates preventing some manufacturers from legally being able to OTA without dealer involvement.
- archi42 6y agoAnother point seems to be upgrade fees - e.g. with Volvo I have to pay for the dealers diagnostics software subscription, for the actual software update itself (yes, really), and for the time it takes because it blocks a slot in the dealers garage (and the diagnostics system). Upgrades effectively easily cost 700 Euro per year, and they can't even tell me what's actually changed (at least it's optional). If we only had the technology to roll out tamperproof updates, even if it was via a USB stick... /s (At least the map updates happen exactly that way). Ergo, I'm under the impression they're really just only using this to siphon more money from the customers.
- fyfy18 6y agoThis is for non-mandatory updates - things like navigation and updates to a slightly less crappy UI. For safety recalls the dealer bills the manufacturer for their time, so as the customer you don't need to pay anything (other than your time to take the car to the dealer). I have a 3rd hand Toyota, and after I bought it I noticed none of the recalls had been done. I called up my local dealer, they ordered the parts, then two weeks later they replaced airbags, fuel tank lid and updated the ECU without me having to pay anything.
- x3n0ph3n3 6y agoHyundai just did something similar with their Kona EVs last month.
- DoofusOfDeath 6y agoThis reminds me of the "Mahk from Haverhill" videos that parodied Chevy's 2017 TV commercials [0] I really, really hope they crank out a few parodies for this recall. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d03svtYlFm8&list=PLoC1ZyvZc4zEuD2u7mCERyImjrTb1vc7G https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d03svtYlFm8&list=PLoC1ZyvZc4...
- glitchdout 6y agoI had never seen this before. Freaking hilarious!
- rootusrootus 6y agoI would like to know more details. Specifically, what changed in 2020 that makes it no longer a risk? I ask because I have a 2020 Bolt sitting out in my driveway.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- pseudosavant 6y agoOnly batteries made by LG Chem have had the issue. I guess they changed suppliers.
- bytesmith 6y agoThey didn't change suppliers they changed the chemistry to provide more range [1] [1] https://www.sae.org/news/2019/12/chevy-tweaks-2020-bolt%E2%80%99s-battery-to-add-range https://www.sae.org/news/2019/12/chevy-tweaks-2020-bolt%E2%8...
- justin66 6y agoLG Chem provide the batteries and the entire powertrain, as well as the infotainment system. Chevy is pretty committed to them for this car.
- tintor 6y ago10% instant range reduction for Bolt EVs.
- dawnerd 6y agoFor now, but likely everyone will end up with a nice new battery. Any less than original range and I can see some massive lawsuits coming.
- bonestamp2 6y agoIt sounds like some law firm is going to make $100 million and the vehicle owners are going to get a $100 certificate to use at their next service appointment.
- BostonEnginerd 6y agoUnfortunately you’re probably correct on that. Class action suits don’t really seem to provide any benefit to the end user.
- mleo 6y agoMy Bolt has been at the dealership for last 2 weeks after the battery failed. It failed while backing out of driveway after the first full charge in a month or two. I was planning to pick it up tomorrow, but now I may delay that.
- ineedasername 6y agoMusk could probably make billions just by licensing their battery technology. Once EVs are truly mass market, competition, as with current automobiles, will drive down margins significantly. Licensing his tech at the same time would really boost the overall profit. Then again I'm just arm-chairing this thing. It's not like I have my own billions to backup my business prowess.
- justapassenger 6y agoThere were multiple Tesla fires, and they nerfed barriers as a response, without issuing recall (https://electrek.co/2019/10/04/tesla-software-updat-battery-capacity-loss-fire-investigation-nhtsa/ https://electrek.co/2019/10/04/tesla-software-updat-battery-...)
- jsight 6y agoAlthough the nerfed Tesla batteries still charge faster than a brand new Bolt.
- lambdasquirrel 6y agoSure, but a Model S costs around twice as much as a Bolt so you’d expect something for that money.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- omgwtfbyobbq 6y agoThat's a good point. I think it only applies to the older Model S, and they may have paid 3-4x more than a Bolt, although the Bolt may not have been available when most of those were purchased. The 3 and newer S/X should be good.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- 6y ago
- ineedasername 6y agoAt least they don't explode on rear impact at medium/low speeds: https://www.tortmuseum.org/ford-pinto/#:~:text=Grimshaw%20v.,was%20ruptured%20in%20a%20collision.&text=A%20spark%20ignited%20the%20mixture,died%20a%20few%20hours%20later https://www.tortmuseum.org/ford-pinto/#:~:text=Grimshaw%20v.....