[rfurmani]

There's a lot of companies out there, and dismissing them outright is the same brand of arrogance that lets startups win over incumbents, but reversed.

> better brand

GM/F/Honda/Toyota/etc are reliable, BMW/Audi/Lexus/etc are luxurious and have a package that's been very carefully tuned

> faster

Doesn't matter to 90%

> longer range

Debatable, also price constrained

> novelty

Not what you look for in a massive purchase that you want to last 10+ years

[aoeu345]

First off, speed matters to the young and environmentally conscious EV market. Range has maxed at 800km on a single charge, there is no

> debate

to be had.

GM and any other electric carmaker will be buying their batteries, powertrains, or both from Tesla after they flop with their own native lineups.

[beering]

Speed didn't matter to the huge Prius market. And with the Bolt supposedly getting 238mi on a charge, that's on par with a Model S 70.

I think you should give GM a little more credit...

[jsjohnst]

In a tiny subcompact car.

My money is more on Ford being a risk factor to Tesla than GM.

[neogodless]

Just so we are clear, the Bolt is a hatchback, not a tiny hatchback. At 56 cu ft, it's a hair 2 cu ft) less than a Model S. The footprint isn't significantly smaller than that of the Model 3.

[jsjohnst]

Bolt's website calls it a subcompact car. Despite what it's actual volume is, it looks like a small car and is classified as one. The Model S is classified as and looks like a luxury full size sedan. Yes, the Model 3 is comparable to the Bolt, but it's not being shipped yet. So comparing the distance of a Model S and a Bolt isn't a fare comparison as the Model S is bigger and heavier, hence my earlier comment in reply to the comparison. If you think comparing the EV range of a 3,500lb subcompact Bolt as being good compared to a nearly 5,000lb full sized sedan then fine, we can agree to disagree.

[baq]

Tiny car means less volume for batteries.

[jsjohnst]

Not necessarily. It could sacrifice interior space for battery space.