Chevy Bolts Suck

[LightningShow]

Sounds like a you problem. Maybe relax chill and wait?‍. You clearly have the belief your need is more important than the person charging when you arrived and that is totally on you. Might be something to ponder the next time you reflect on your life, your priorities, and how to be a good person?

I encourage you and everyone else to just chill, because someday you might need to charge your Lightning to more than 85% at a DCFC. It seems like several of you are developing charging rage and the last thing we need is an incident hitting the news because someone with narcissistic tendencies chooses to “help educate” someone that needs to charge.

Remember breath, relax, and enjoy life. The few minutes you spend relaxing is way more beneficial to your body and soul than being “that person” who thinks everything is about them in that moment. Live ?.

I guess I'll repeat myself...I'm not saying anyone shouldn't be able to charge to whatever percentage they like. I'm only saying it should cost you more for the privilege. I don't quite understand why this has your panties in a twist. I'd be happy to pay the extra cost when I need to charge to 90% or 100% in order to have better functioning charging network for everyone. You seem to feel quite entitled to use the service in whatever way you feel suits you best to the exclusion of everyone else who has to share the service. You're clearly the selfish one in this scenario yet you've convinced yourself that it's the *other* people who are selfish because of some imaginary "right" you have to charge your truck at the same price regardless of what it costs the provider. Might be something to ponder the next time you reflect on your life, your priorities, and how to be a good person.

Sponsored

 

[Grease Lightning]

I think we’re fine without the sexist condescension adding to the already palpable atmosphere of the thread.


Here’s the crux of the issue. Either we want wider EV adoption, or we want it to remain a small exclusive club for those with the privilege to afford it. Inflicting “financial pain” positions those who support that concept firmly in the latter clubhouse. While you might be fine paying a penalty it might be impossible for the average person to take that on.


I would recommend we it pleasant rather than devolving into the passive aggressive.

Thank you for your great insight into a very “aggressively toxic” thread.

 

[Jim Lewis]

Charging extra for those last few percent would really suck for those of us who need it. This will b e less of a problem over the coming years when charging improves, though.

Here's a crazy idea that might cause quite a few guffaws (or ROFL smilies!).

The thought was occasioned by the idea that there will be some people who truly do need to charge to 100% to make it to the next charger on their trip, because of towing, or whatever. So why make them suffer an exorbitant charge-to-100% fee?

In other situations like this - the need to burn lots of polluting fuel - the carbon tax - cap-and-trade has been suggested.

So, some enterprising charging network(s) might institute a similar system. Everyone who subscribes or buys kWh on a network gets a proportional monthly ration of REWARD points that might be used to offset a steep charge-to-100% fee. But since the REWARDS points would be rationed, you'd only get so many a month to burn, maybe proportional to how many kWh you purchased over some time period. But there would be some system for buying them from other network users who never used all their monthly REWARD points. I'm not going to work out the gory details, but the basic idea is by using your rationed REWARD points, you get a certain amount of GET OUT OF JAIL free charge-to-100% sessions without paying the exorbitant fee to discourage 100% charging, but after a point, you're going to have to pay the free market price for the privilege by buying unused REWARD points from someone else or else pay the add-on exorbitant charge-to-100% fee. So the charge-to-100% folks would get a bit of a break for truly needed situations but also, through having to use rationed REWARD cards, would get the idea that there is a limit to the extent charge-to-100% is tolerated without incurring a financial penalty in one way or the other to do it. The feedback to the network providers on how charge-to-100% fees and rationed REWARD cards are working might encourage them to find an improved way to make things work even MORE BETTER.

Edit_Update_Postscript: Two further ideas on incentivizing and educating drivers not to charge to 100% unless unless it's really needed and worth it.

1. The charge-to-100% fee should vary with expected demand at a given location for date and time. Likewise, the number of REWARD points required to avoid the extra charge-to-100% surcharge should increase or decrease in parallel to variations in the surcharge fee, i.e., if it's 3 am and all chargers are vacant, you don't need to apply the charge-to-100% surcharge or need to use REWARD points to avoid the surcharge.
2. If someone is charging to 100% and demand for chargers is building up at that location, those charging could be incentivized to stop charging if they garned future-use REWARD points by vacating the charger. Not sure I've considered all the ways folks could try to scam such a system, but the best way to avoid scamming seems to be the following:
   • For charging below, say, 80% SOC, the more you charge, the more future REWARD points you earn. If you go past 80%, you start losing more and more of those future REWARD points you earned going up the charging curve at lower states of charge. To avoid the charge-to-100% surcharge, you have to use previously earned REWARD points already accredited to your account/vehicle. The sooner you vacate the charger after reaching 80% SOC, the more future REWARD points you'll keep.

Although a REWARD system seems clunky, most of us are used to Reward points on credit cards or deciding whether to buy something when it's on sale, then looking at our receipt over many items to see if we got the expected markdowns on all the bargain items we bought on a given shopping trip. If one had an incentive system that encouraged considerate behavior, folks might buy into it even though it introduced more complicated economics. Tax systems and incentives are sometimes designed to encourage desired cultural behavior.

 

[RickLightning]

Here's the problem. Who educates the owners if not the car companies or the dealerships? We, the public.

On our recent trip of 2,900 miles, we saw all makes and models charging to 100%. Met a woman trying unsuccessfully to charge, she had a negative balance on her EA account... Had an expensive EV try to backup nearly over me to use the 2nd cord on my charger... Car companies are partnering with Uber drivers to give them cheap cars and discounted charging, and they always charge to 100% and are often Bolts.

Somebody needs to educate these car owners.

 

[JRT]

Not understanding the car was very apparent, in my very small sample size, it was always Bolts owners.

I'm not trying to be toxic maybe a bit too much emotions. Honestly or return trip went better because I counted on bad EV etiquette. I'm also not buying the it will be better soon, that was said back in 2021 on the Mach-e forum and in that time only 2 viable chathing options on my maintenance travel routes have been added.

 

[Grease Lightning]

Here's the problem. Who educates the owners if not the car companies or the dealerships? We, the public.

On our recent trip of 2,900 miles, we saw all makes and models charging to 100%. Met a woman trying unsuccessfully to charge, she had a negative balance on her EA account... Had an expensive EV try to backup nearly over me to use the 2nd cord on my charger... Car companies are partnering with Uber drivers to give them cheap cars and discounted charging, and they always charge to 100% and are often Bolts.

Somebody needs to educate these car owners.

The challenge with the “we educate” approach is to you you might think you are the first “helpful” person to approach to “educate” me and little do you know you are the 5th person to do the same thing while I am trying to charge to 100%. All it takes is you to come across that one person that snaps after being “helped” so many times in something they know what they are doing.

This thread shows there are aggressive ev owners that get frustrated because they need instant gratification of their own singular needs. That frustration is not something the other person that was quietly charging asked for, needs, or deserves.

Frankly we don’t know what any person we are approaching went through that day, that their mental heath is at that moment, if they are charging to 100% for a reason, or if they are the minority that actually need help.

While good intentioned, each time you feel the need to unsolicited educate someone, you could be placing you and your loved ones at risk. Think of that the next time.

Is it worth walking up to a stranger at the middle of the night? Would an extra 20 minutes add to a 30-50 minute charge cycle, really delay you more than having to wait for the cops, going to the hospital, the jail, or loosing your life? We have all seen or experienced road rage, it is clear we are now at the cusp of a new chapter of “charging rage”.

 

[RickLightning]

Is it worth walking up to a stranger at the middle of the night? Would an extra 20 minutes add to a 30-50 minute charge cycle, really delay you more than having to wait for the cops, going to the hospital, the jail, or loosing your life? We have all seen or experienced road rage, it is clear we are now at the cusp of a new chapter of “charging rage”.

I would never approach anyone at night, and I evaluate each situation. Yes, we do need to be careful regardless.

 

[TheWoo]

The challenge with the “we educate” approach is to you you might think you are the first “helpful” person to approach to “educate” me and little do you know you are the 5th person to do the same thing while I am trying to charge to 100%. All it takes is you to come across that one person that snaps after being “helped” so many times in something they know what they are doing.

This thread shows there are aggressive ev owners that get frustrated because they need instant gratification of their own singular needs. That frustration is not something the other person that was quietly charging asked for, needs, or deserves.

Frankly we don’t know what any person we are approaching went through that day, that their mental heath is at that moment, if they are charging to 100% for a reason, or if they are the minority that actually need help.

While good intentioned, each time you feel the need to unsolicited educate someone, you could be placing you and your loved ones at risk. Think of that the next time.

Is it worth walking up to a stranger at the middle of the night? Would an extra 20 minutes add to a 30-50 minute charge cycle, really delay you more than having to wait for the cops, going to the hospital, the jail, or loosing your life? We have all seen or experienced road rage, it is clear we are now at the cusp of a new chapter of “charging rage”.

All of which could be solved through economic incentives to not stretch the use of a scarce resource beyond an individual's needs. You seem to want to place all the blame on the person who needs to charge but can't, while excusing the inefficient use of a finite resource.

There is lots of gray in this discussion, but I am on the side of encouraging DCFC vendors to implement financial incentives to make more efficient use of their chargers.

 

[JRT]

Ya I'm not volunteering helping unless I was asked. I had 1 older lady, I'm guessing late 60s in a new Mercedes EQS and she had limited understanding. I told her I'd help her at a pay station at Costco and she almost backed into my truck lol. I got her up and charging and she was very appreciative.

 

[Grease Lightning]

All of which could be solved through economic incentives to not stretch the use of a scarce resource beyond an individual's needs. You seem to want to place all the blame on the person who needs to charge but can't, while excusing the inefficient use of a finite resource.

There is lots of gray in this discussion, but I am on the side of encouraging DCFC vendors to implement financial incentives to make more efficient use of their chargers.

I am placing the blame of the person that is impatient, needs instant gratification, and doesn’t value the person there before them, you are 1000% correct.

Not sure how you find your chargers, but I use an App and that app shows me if there are chargers available or if they are in use. So I generally know what to expect prior to rolling into the parking lot. If I chose to go to a full lot, I pull up my big boy pants and wait, or drive to my back up plan.

Incentives and penalties only work to a point. If I am there for a need, being charged more does not make you get the charger any faster. You are still frustrated and the dispensary owner made more money in the same kW. So what did we gain? Now two frustrated people.

So while your solution takes off a percentage, it does not solve the problem nor does it solve the inherent issue with most on this thread…. Have patience and enjoy life.

Life is too short to be frustrated at the simplest things. Remember you can truly only control you and your actions.

 

[JRT]

I'm glad your plan has worked and you have the patience of a Saint. I was maybe frustrated, but still patient with the situation. My trip down basically made me completely plan my return to charge before Atlanta and after as the status wasn't accurate and the ridiculous clog of bolts seemed to be a continuous issue. Atlanta stations then become my backup. Looking at V3 and up Tesla stations on my route will have a much better options and plan including stops NOT in Walmart for everyone to get out for food and stretch breaks.

 

[Jim Lewis]

I added a few ideas to my "cap-and-trade" REWARD point system to disincentivize charging to 100% except when it's really needed.

1. Any charge-to-100% surcharge tax should be adjusted to the expected demand at a charger location for a given date and time. For example, you probably don't need to have a heavy charge-to-100% surcharge at 3 am.
2. Any reward system should reward users who've charged up to 80% from lower states of charge for stopping at 80%. Charging up to 80% earns the maximum future reward points. If you keep charging past 80%, you start losing future credits earned from your current charging session the more you keep charging past 80% SOC. Also, the applicable charge-to-100% surcharge adjusted for expected demand on the current date and time will kick in, which can be defrayed by using already earned discount REWARD points for your vehicle from past charging sessions on a network. If you don't have any in-the-bank REWARD points or can't buy any from other network users, you pay the charge-to-100 surcharge in full.

By controlling how REWARD points are doled out and how surcharges are applied, a network might allow or discourage charging to 100% to the extent that maximizes customer satisfaction with charger availability. Policies could be tailored to demand at specific locations.

https://www.f150lightningforum.com/forum/threads/chevy-bolts-suck.17697/post-359096 (my previous scatter-brained thoughts)

 

[Maxx]

A well designed system allows the uneducated and experienced user, the wealthy and poor, the fast and slow coexist. It is just that our charging infrastructure is in it's infancy and needs to evolve. A good design eliminate bad choices and make the right choice the selfish choice.

 

[Zprime29]

If there is an open and fully functional stall at a site, there is no need to penalize someone trying to charge to 100%. I'd be okay with demand fee's for charging over 90% once every available stall is in use and someone indicates a need to charge. I imagine a scenario where I pull up and see everything is in use (assuming all stalls are working). I open the app and tap the "high demand" button for this site. Any person charging that is at a SOC >90% gets a notification that they have 5 min to unplug due to site demand before additional fee's are tacked on.

If we can wait an extra 20 min for a 45 min charging stop, then I don't think it unreasonable for someone that needs 90%+ to wait 20-30 min for what is likely a 1.5 hour stop.

There is financial gain for the site operators to maximize throughput so it is inevitable that something along these lines pops up. We ought to be promoting solutions that benefit all as opposed to benefitting the operator only.

 

[roadhouse]

I mean the issue with the 'charging extra at high demand sites' is that by sites in high demand are (by definition) less likely to have alternative charging sites close - which is why people could be trying to squeeze any charge they can out.

I was in this position over Christmas during a trip where there was only one charging station, at roughly the midway point of a journey (with 4 chargers available). My options were
1. Charge to 90+ at a previous charger to give me alternative stop options, or
2. Take a chance on the midpoint spot that was in a charging hole, so if the line was 10+ cars (which it was over Thanksgiving based on Plugshare photos), or wasn't working, I would literally be stuck.

(I took option one, FWIW)

As Maxx says, we shouldn't be wasting effort on incentivizing all sorts of complex behaviors and scenarios - more chargers is the inevitable solution.

Sponsored