2015 Chevy Spark EV specifications

[Nashco]

I stumbled on a link that has a bunch of specifications on the 2015 Spark EV. There are some highlighted changes for 2015, all of which seem like improvements in my opinion (colors are obviously subjective):

http://www.gmfleetorderguide.com/NASApp/domestic/proddesc.jsp?year=2014&butID=1&regionID=1&divisionID=0&vehicleID=15743&type=1

Chevrolet Car (2015) Spark EV

Deletions

Spark EV Deletions include:
- (GYV) Titanium exterior color
- (FXP) 3.17 final drive ratio axle

New Features

Spark EV New Features include:
- (FX6) 3.87 final drive ratio axle
- Late availability exterior colors for 2LT only: (G6E) Salsa and (G6F) Lime
- Late availability (VV4) OnStar Gen 10 with 4G and Wi-Fi hotspot capability

Changes

Spark EV Changes include:
- Larger EV Eco badge
- Late introduction: 2LT interior Electric Blue trim and accents are dropped and replaced with Silver
- Late introduction: Instrument panel cluster surround changes from Electric Blue to Piano Black for both 1LT and 2LT
- Late introduction: Stitching on shift boot cover and leather-wrapped steering wheel changes from Electric Blue to Black

That's the gearing I wanted, and the interior trim I think many will appreciate...I hate the baby blue stuff on an otherwise not-blue car and I don't think I'm alone. I'm glad to hear the different planetary gearset is mechanically compatible, as I previously suspected, as this is a very easy way to improve acceleration if you are willing to sacrifice top speed. I'll be very curious to see if they are using that to reduce motor torque and be nicer to components, or if they'll leave the motor performance as is and increase vehicle performance.

Bryce

 

[MysteriousJ]

Deletions

Spark EV Deletions include:
- (GYV) Titanium exterior color

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooo! I prefer titanium to black granite. I will never own another purely 'Black' car ever again (too much maintenance to keep it shiny, scratch free)

then again

Late availability exterior colors for 2LT only: (G6E) Salsa

I wouldn't mind a Salsa red spark

Late introduction: 2LT interior Electric Blue trim and accents are dropped and replaced with Silver
- Late introduction: Instrument panel cluster surround changes from Electric Blue to Piano Black for both 1LT and 2LT

It's about time, this is one of the 'lame' things about the current version of this car and one of the first things I would be interested in modding if I had purchased it.

 

[Nashco]

Sounds like if you want Titanium, you better buy soon! Interior is easy to change out later, body color is a big deal.

Bryce

 

[MysteriousJ]

Sounds like if you want Titanium, you better buy soon! Interior is easy to change out later, body color is a big deal.

Bryce

I would have purchased one by now if it weren't for my job having me travel to several places between the mid-west and the east coast for the next 6 months. The only option is to use my ICE car to make these trips.

Perhaps by the end of august the 2015 version will be available and hopefully more DCFC stations pop up.

 

[psykokid]

Late introduction: 2LT interior Electric Blue trim and accents are dropped and replaced with Silver
- Late introduction: Instrument panel cluster surround changes from Electric Blue to Piano Black for both 1LT and 2LT

It's about time, this is one of the 'lame' things about the current version of this car and one of the first things I would be interested in modding if I had purchased it.

That's one of the main reasons why ours had to be blue The blue interior trim in a non blue car would have driven me nuts. On the blue cars it works, others including black, not so much..

 

[emotodude]

So they're switching to a taller gear ratio or just as an option? If they are not upping the motor torque as well, that is a substantial reduction in torque to the wheels, approx 20%. Not that "most" people really need it, and the small improvement in range is probably a worthwhile trade off for most.

But I'm glad I have my "peppy" version

 

[Nashco]

Other way around, 2014 is 3.17 and 2015 is 3.87, which means if they use the exact same motor torque curve the 2015 will accelerate faster but have a theoretically reduced top speed.

Bryce

 

[TonyWilliams]

Other way around, 2014 is 3.17 and 2015 is 3.87, which means if they use the exact same motor torque curve the 2015 will accelerate faster but have a theoretically reduced top speed.

Bryce

And probably lower economy at the same speed as a 2014 model. Everything in design and engineering has a trade-off.

 

[Nashco]

Other way around, 2014 is 3.17 and 2015 is 3.87, which means if they use the exact same motor torque curve the 2015 will accelerate faster but have a theoretically reduced top speed.

Bryce

And probably lower economy at the same speed as a 2014 model. Everything in design and engineering has a trade-off.

It all depends on the operation point used for your duty cycle versus the motor efficiency plot. If you travel on more city streets, at low speeds, it might actually improve range. Until it's actually released, though, this is all just speculation.

Bryce

 

[nozferatu]

What a real shame they don't offer xenon or HID options...real real real shame. That would have really improved the car's appeal.

Drop the silly shifter too...just put buttons for crying out loud!

They can also drop the cheesy chrome accents that seems to be the bane of all American cars...for the life of me I don't know why.

 

[nozferatu]

Other way around, 2014 is 3.17 and 2015 is 3.87, which means if they use the exact same motor torque curve the 2015 will accelerate faster but have a theoretically reduced top speed.

Bryce

It would be quite spectacular if they could improve the acceleration even more-so....I'd hate to lose the phenomenal midrange acceleration of the current car. I really hope they aren't that stupid to reduce the torque after touting about it so much.

 

[Blackmamba]

Other way around, 2014 is 3.17 and 2015 is 3.87, which means if they use the exact same motor torque curve the 2015 will accelerate faster but have a theoretically reduced top speed.

Bryce

And probably lower economy at the same speed as a 2014 model. Everything in design and engineering has a trade-off.

Top speed is governed, they just have to bump up the governed limit a bit to match things. And maybe they'll dip into the battery a bit more to match or even exceed the previous range figure.

Like Car & Driver found out, GM dotted all the i's and crossed all the t's when they developed the Spark EV. These changes are just tweaks. No major fault needing to be addressed such as what Nissan still needs to do with the Leaf - get a battery with active temperature management.

 

[Pegasus]

- Late availability exterior colors for 2LT only: (G6E) Salsa and (G6F) Lime

Aw, for crying out loud! I was whining about this like crazy so I'm glad enough others have so that GM heard us, but I already have my Spark EV in Titanium! I guess I can be happy that it'll soon be a "collectable" color. :lol:

 

[gra]

Other way around, 2014 is 3.17 and 2015 is 3.87, which means if they use the exact same motor torque curve the 2015 will accelerate faster but have a theoretically reduced top speed.

Bryce

It would be quite spectacular if they could improve the acceleration even more-so....I'd hate to lose the phenomenal midrange acceleration of the current car. I really hope they aren't that stupid to reduce the torque after touting about it so much.

Not to mention losing the car's freeway range advantage (if they go with a shorter ratio), which to me is its primary advantage.

 

[Blackmamba]

Not to mention losing the car's freeway range advantage (if they go with a shorter ratio), which to me is its primary advantage.

You are way overestimating the effects of the change. The change difference in ratios is not that great. There still will remain a significant gap in final drive ratios between the '15 Spark EV and any other EV out there. A big gap....

The result is going to be better off the line acceleration with a minimal, if even noticeable, change in range. In fact I'll bet range numbers will stay the same or even go up a tad, as I would guess GM would tap into the battery a bit more in order to keep the EPA figures from falling.

 

[Blackmamba]

Not to mention losing the car's freeway range advantage (if they go with a shorter ratio), which to me is its primary advantage.

You are way overestimating the effects of the change. The change difference in ratios is not that great. There still will remain a significant gap in final drive ratios between the '15 Spark EV and any other EV out there. A big gap....

The result is going to be better off the line acceleration with a minimal, if even noticeable, change in range. In fact I'll bet range numbers will stay the same or even go up a tad, as I would guess GM would tap into the battery a bit more in order to keep the EPA figures from falling.

Maybe the old ratio was a tad too tall for the drive motor to operate at peak efficiency.

It just might be that GM engineers determined a slight bump in ratio would move things closer to the car's mechanical 'sweet spot'.

 

[Nashco]

I witnessed a presentation GM gave at the 2013 SAE Hybrid and EV Symposium where Steve Tarnowsky (Engineering Manager at GM) gave a presentation which included discussions on the powertrain efficiency versus performance balance and some of the reasons GM used such a unique torque/gearing selection compared to typical EV powertrains. If any of you are curious of the high level points discussed, you can see the presentation on the internet. Of course, there was more discussed than simply what you see in the pdf/powerpoint, but it gives you the highlights.

This is a link to the SAE event guide:

http://www.sae.org/events/hybridev/2013_HybridEV_Event_Guide.pdf

This guide includes a link to the presentations:

http://www.sae.org/events/training/symposia/hybrid/presentations/anaheim2013/

User: 2013Hybrid
Password: Anaheim

Which leads you to this link:

http://www.sae.org/events/training/symposia/hybrid/presentations/anaheim2013/SAE_Thursday/Steven_Tarnowsky-GM-2014_Chevrolet_Spark_EV_Propulsion_System.pdf

In summary, there's no clarity to what the gear ratio change will be on performance for production 2015 Spark EV at this time. However, it's obvious that the improvement or reduction in range is directly related to YOUR duty cycle. It's also obvious that acceleration is not only a function of ratios versus speed, but software and hardware limitations as well. We all know that official range numbers are a valuable measurement for simple comparison sake, but that range/efficiency are very related to your duty cycle. If you travel at city speeds a lot, a higher numerical ratio will generally improve your efficiency. If you travel at highway speeds at 55 mph, the ratio change will likely improve your range slightly. If you travel at highway speeds at 75, the ratio change will likely reduce your range slightly. However, until a vehicle comes out with production software and hardware, there's no way to know for sure.

Bryce

 

[nozferatu]

I witnessed a presentation GM gave at the 2013 SAE Hybrid and EV Symposium where Steve Tarnowsky (Engineering Manager at GM) gave a presentation which included discussions on the powertrain efficiency versus performance balance and some of the reasons GM used such a unique torque/gearing selection compared to typical EV powertrains. If any of you are curious of the high level points discussed, you can see the presentation on the internet. Of course, there was more discussed than simply what you see in the pdf/powerpoint, but it gives you the highlights.

This is a link to the SAE event guide:

http://www.sae.org/events/hybridev/2013_HybridEV_Event_Guide.pdf

This guide includes a link to the presentations:

http://www.sae.org/events/training/symposia/hybrid/presentations/anaheim2013/

User: 2013Hybrid
Password: Anaheim

Which leads you to this link:

http://www.sae.org/events/training/symposia/hybrid/presentations/anaheim2013/SAE_Thursday/Steven_Tarnowsky-GM-2014_Chevrolet_Spark_EV_Propulsion_System.pdf

In summary, there's no clarity to what the gear ratio change will be on performance for production 2015 Spark EV at this time. However, it's obvious that the improvement or reduction in range is directly related to YOUR duty cycle. It's also obvious that acceleration is not only a function of ratios versus speed, but software and hardware limitations as well. We all know that official range numbers are a valuable measurement for simple comparison sake, but that range/efficiency are very related to your duty cycle. If you travel at city speeds a lot, a higher numerical ratio will generally improve your efficiency. If you travel at highway speeds at 55 mph, the ratio change will likely improve your range slightly. If you travel at highway speeds at 75, the ratio change will likely reduce your range slightly. However, until a vehicle comes out with production software and hardware, there's no way to know for sure.

Bryce

Bryce,

I tend to agree about the acceleration observations. I would venture to say that the current acceleration capabilities of the Spark EV are limited electronically rather than mechanically.

A case in point is if you compare the acceleration times of the Spark EV to the Fiat 500e. Off the line, the Fiat has the Spark beat up to about 50 mph. Not until about 50 does the Spark gain advantage. Given that the Spark and Fiat weigh roughly the same and they have similar top speeds...but the Spark has both more power and FAR more torque...the quicker off-the-line acceleration is, IMO, due to electronically limited power and torque on the Spark EV.

But going back to the minor changes for the Spark EV for 2015, I think the features I mentioned that they left out would have been really nice.

 

[Blackmamba]

Bryce,

I tend to agree about the acceleration observations. I would venture to say that the current acceleration capabilities of the Spark EV are limited electronically rather than mechanically.

A case in point is if you compare the acceleration times of the Spark EV to the Fiat 500e. Off the line, the Fiat has the Spark beat up to about 50 mph. Not until about 50 does the Spark gain advantage. Given that the Spark and Fiat weigh roughly the same and they have similar top speeds...but the Spark has both more power and FAR more torque...the quicker off-the-line acceleration is, IMO, due to electronically limited power and torque on the Spark EV.

But going back to the minor changes for the Spark EV for 2015, I think the features I mentioned that they left out would have been really nice.

I presume there are electronic limiters that are involved too, but who knows to what extent. The obvious difference between the Fiat and the SParkEV is that final drive ratio where the Spark has long legs which take longer to get rolling, but once rolling it really gets rolling - the Fiat has short legs which start fast but lose it as speed climbs.

Kind of like starting from a standstill on a bicycle with its chain in the big ring up front and the smallest ring in the back (Spark) going against a bicycle starting in the small ring up front and a larger ring at the rear (Fiat). The monster torque in the Spark keeps it from getting totally disrespected at the start.

 

[gra]

<snip>
In summary, there's no clarity to what the gear ratio change will be on performance for production 2015 Spark EV at this time. However, it's obvious that the improvement or reduction in range is directly related to YOUR duty cycle. It's also obvious that acceleration is not only a function of ratios versus speed, but software and hardware limitations as well. We all know that official range numbers are a valuable measurement for simple comparison sake, but that range/efficiency are very related to your duty cycle. If you travel at city speeds a lot, a higher numerical ratio will generally improve your efficiency. If you travel at highway speeds at 55 mph, the ratio change will likely improve your range slightly. If you travel at highway speeds at 75, the ratio change will likely reduce your range slightly. However, until a vehicle comes out with production software and hardware, there's no way to know for sure.

Bryce

Agree that an individual's duty cycle is the key to range. For me, the Spark's better range at realistic freeway speeds would be the deciding factor. For what the car is, I can see little practical benefit to a faster 0-60 time, or even improving the 0-30 time. I don't think there's any need to compete even more with the i3; neither car provides the kind of acceleration that a true gearhead will want.

I doubt that many people are finding their BEVs range-limited in all-urban surface street driving. Speeds are too low and there's lots of regen. No, where most people have range issues is with part or all-freeway commutes and similar trips at realistic speeds, and IMO that's where the major emphasis needs to be to make BEVs more mainstream.

Most states have interstate speed limits of at least 65 mph, with most western states having rural interstate limits of 70, 75 or even 80, and actual cruising speeds in unconstrained flow tend to be 5-10 mph over the speed limit. Although it is often impossible to reach those speeds at the height of rush hour, outside of those times it's quite common. For me personally, I'd happily give up a second or two 0-60 (so equivalent to a LEAF or Focus) to gain 10 or 15 miles more range at 65+ mph, and retain or improve 30-50 and 50-70 passing accel. I regard the latter as far more useful in the real world than 0-60 times; I'm not interested in drag racing, but I do have to merge with or pass traffic regularly.