Suggestions: Dear Chevrolet

[supcrds]

I don't think so....my Fiat 500 isn't much more expensive than the Spark...yet I think it has a far superior interior than the Spark.

Perhaps due to low volume it may cost more true I agree there..but I doubt it's as much as you think...it's simply an option on select cars that...for all practical purposes, are built on the same assembly line as the standard Spark. The Fiat 500E has about the same price differential between my car as does the Spark to Spark EV....and it's volume is low too.

It is different for the fiat. While you can get a 500 "near" the price of the spark (if $3000 more is near) the spark tops out at $18,000 and the fiat at $25,000+. So fiat has more upscale trim they can use without producing from scratch. The spark ev is already equipped with the "best" trim available. Unfortunately that is pretty low. For GM to make anything unique for the EV there is no chance for enough volume to payback. For me anyway the low price is a main consideration for the spark ev so since there can be only one, I am glad they built the one I want.

 

[gra]

Indeed, the only reasons EVs sell at all (other than Tesla) is because the government subsidies bring the price down from 'ridiculous' to merely 'still too expensive for what you get, but workable for some with the right motivation'.

Actually, in our case the Spark EV was a stone bargain. We have two drivers, one daily, one occasional, and about 90% of our annual 12k miles are within the Sparks range. Our cars were a new Honda Fit and a 20 year old Accord (great car, but pretty well used up with 1/4 million miles). With the Spark we get to drive a new fun car that is easy to park and nimble in traffic while reducing our CO2 footprint instead of putting a bunch of miles on the Fit and hoping the Accord holds out. Over the three years of the lease it works out net of everything to cost less than $50 per month for the Spark vs keeping the Accord. If we drove a bit more it would work out to be free.

Plus, we love the Spark. The Fit is a great small car, probably the benchmark car in the segment, but my wife and I argue over whose turn it is to take the Spark because it's so great to drive. Having lived with an electric for a few months I can't see ever buying another ICE car. So while cheap is good, the experience is also a reason electrics will sell once people have more exposure to them.

Yes, with incentives, and if you are leasing and thus don't have to deal with major battery degradation issues, a BEV like the Spark can be a good deal, and the driving experience is much better on the electric version. But it's still far too expensive to sell without the incentives, for anyone who isn't motivated to a large extent by ideology. We need to get the price down and the range up to where these cars can sell without the incentives and be people's sole car, and we're a long way away from that yet.

For example, a $13k 68 mile Smart ED (base MSRP in California after fed and state incentives) is reasonably justifiable for a city commute car, when the base gas model is $13,270; a $23k without incentives 68 mile Smart ED isn't, except for the tiny # of extreme greens. Similarly, a $27.5k 82 mile Spark EV isn't justifiable when the base gas car is available for $12,170, but it may be at $17.5k when TCO is considered. It will probably take at least double the range at the same or lower than current price for the mainstream to consider these as sole cars.

 

[nozferatu]

I don't think so....my Fiat 500 isn't much more expensive than the Spark...yet I think it has a far superior interior than the Spark.

Perhaps due to low volume it may cost more true I agree there..but I doubt it's as much as you think...it's simply an option on select cars that...for all practical purposes, are built on the same assembly line as the standard Spark. The Fiat 500E has about the same price differential between my car as does the Spark to Spark EV....and it's volume is low too.

It is different for the fiat. While you can get a 500 "near" the price of the spark (if $3000 more is near) the spark tops out at $18,000 and the fiat at $25,000+. So fiat has more upscale trim they can use without producing from scratch. The spark ev is already equipped with the "best" trim available. Unfortunately that is pretty low. For GM to make anything unique for the EV there is no chance for enough volume to payback. For me anyway the low price is a main consideration for the spark ev so since there can be only one, I am glad they built the one I want.

Remember a $25k Fiat is not the same car as the Spark..you have to compare models that are comparable. For $25K you are now venturing into Abarth territory which is an entirely different beast than a Spark in every way possible. I got my Sport fully loaded for $17K...very comparable to a Spark fully loaded.. I do agree with you the Spark EV's best trim is pretty low. Which is unfortunate being that it's a flagship sort of vehicle for GM in the small EV vehicle market. I say put your best foot forward or don't do it at all.

I personally think there isn't much to it in upgrading trim. It's more hype by the automakers than anything else. It's a way for them to create a cash cow and make it look like they are performing a big deal. That's the name of the game. Besides, a few small touches here and there would make a world of difference and probably add a few hundred dollars to the entire Spark fleet build.

Just my 2c.

 

[nozferatu]

Indeed, the only reasons EVs sell at all (other than Tesla) is because the government subsidies bring the price down from 'ridiculous' to merely 'still too expensive for what you get, but workable for some with the right motivation'.

Actually, in our case the Spark EV was a stone bargain. We have two drivers, one daily, one occasional, and about 90% of our annual 12k miles are within the Sparks range. Our cars were a new Honda Fit and a 20 year old Accord (great car, but pretty well used up with 1/4 million miles). With the Spark we get to drive a new fun car that is easy to park and nimble in traffic while reducing our CO2 footprint instead of putting a bunch of miles on the Fit and hoping the Accord holds out. Over the three years of the lease it works out net of everything to cost less than $50 per month for the Spark vs keeping the Accord. If we drove a bit more it would work out to be free.

Plus, we love the Spark. The Fit is a great small car, probably the benchmark car in the segment, but my wife and I argue over whose turn it is to take the Spark because it's so great to drive. Having lived with an electric for a few months I can't see ever buying another ICE car. So while cheap is good, the experience is also a reason electrics will sell once people have more exposure to them.

Yes, with incentives, and if you are leasing and thus don't have to deal with major battery degradation issues, a BEV like the Spark can be a good deal, and the driving experience is much better on the electric version. But it's still far too expensive to sell without the incentives, for anyone who isn't motivated to a large extent by ideology. We need to get the price down and the range up to where these cars can sell without the incentives and be people's sole car, and we're a long way away from that yet.

For example, a $13k 68 mile Smart ED (base MSRP in California after fed and state incentives) is reasonably justifiable for a city commute car, when the base gas model is $13,270; a $23k without incentives 68 mile Smart ED isn't, except for the tiny # of extreme greens. Similarly, a $27.5k 82 mile Spark EV isn't justifiable when the base gas car is available for $12,170, but it may be at $17.5k when TCO is considered. It will probably take at least double the range at the same or lower than current price for the mainstream to consider these as sole cars.

The biggest price driver are the batteries. Everything else has been done and figured out by automakers and costs little to implement IMO.

I'm a relatively environmentally conscious person...however I have a real issue with some "extreme green" people because they don't have a grasp of reality in as far as where they think their energy comes from and how efficient they are ultimately when driving an EV. I'm going to do a quick calculation and analysis of some efficiency, etc figures in another thread which I hope people will join and add/correct/whatever to my own comments.

With that said, I truly personally believe that automakers are and have purposefully retarded the progress of EV's and alternative energy transport systems due to status quo and oil lobby and oil industry influence. There is no denying it and definitely irrefutable proof of such things and no point categorizing it as "conspiracy."....alas another thread entirely!

Cheerio!

 

[FutureFolly]

I'm glad the development of the Spark EV focused on engineering and economics over aesthetics and materials. Most people that buy the Spark instead of the Sonic are prioritizing dollars, and the EV will never be able to escape that entirely. EV owners should feel like they are driving the most premium Spark in some way though. The Spark has a redesign coming around the corner, so I totally understand GM waiting to make any improvements. Americans aren't the only ones that want higher quality interiors too.

I personally like that Chevy chose two trims. It starts the trend of offering a premium trim even if leatherette isn't a premium upgrade. Future models can easily widen the gap between the two trims with better features and options as demand for the EV grows without moving the base price. GM is committed to the Spark EV. I can tell they have big plans for it.

Success of the Spark EV depends on people that are going to use it as an appliance more than environmentalists. This means things like cost of ownership are big factors. The lower operating costs of EVs are less significant the higher the depreciation costs are.

I would also like to remind people that upgrading the charger and materials in the interior are much easier and cheaper than upgrading the crash protection, chassis, powertrain, or suspension. All things that don't need to be done for the next generation. If anyone remembers the first generation Honda Fit, it was horribly suited to Americans. Now Honda owns the subcompact hatchback segment.

 

[Porsche]

1. provide an option to charge up to a certain level of the battery - like 80%. my daily commute starts on top of a hill, and goes down from there for about 8mi. since the battery is already fully charged, the regen capability is useless.

OK, this post is pretty old, but I thought I'd make a suggestion. Instead of charging immediately, or even setting a delayed charge, you can set the charge time to end at your expected departure time. But, set the planned departure time for a few hours later than your actual departure time. You'll stop charging early and end up around 80%. After a few tries you can home in on exactly how much time to leave. If you're not actually departing, you can set a reminder to stop the charge. Not perfect, but might work for you.