2018 CHEVROLET BOLT EV Complaints

The contact owns a 2018 Chevrolet Bolt EV. The contact received a notification of NHTSA campaign number 21V560000 (Electrical System) however, the part to do the recall repair was unavailable. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The vehicle was taken to the dealer and it was confirmed that parts were not yet available. The manufacturer was notified of the issue. The contact had not experienced a failure. Parts distribution disconnect.

2018 CHEVROLET BOLT. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO ENGINE FAILURE. THE CONSUMER STATED THE VEHICLE FAILED TO START. THE DEALER ADVISED THE BATTERY HAD A BAD CELL AND A PROGRAM ISSUE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT OPERATIONAL AND IT WAS UNKNOWN WHEN A FIX WOULD BECOME UNAVAILABLE. THE CONSUMER REQUESTED A REQUESTED A LOANER VEHICLE.

Driving curvy mountain road and the steering wheel fails to return to center. Nearly caused a terrible accident.

Parking like this is not practical and GM needs to expedite this buyback: https://insideevs.com/news/533584/chevrolet-bolt-ownership-becoming-impossible/ https://www.kbb.com/car-news/gm-tells-some-chevy-bolt-owners-park-50-ft-from-other-cars/ https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/15/gm-advising-some-bolt-ev-owners-to-park-50-feet-away-from-other-cars.html

The contact leased a 2018 Chevrolet Bolt EV. The contact received notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 21V560000 (Electrical System) however, the part to do the recall repair was unavailable. The local dealer was contacted and referred the contact to the manufacturer. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The manufacturer was notified of the issue and informed the contact about a buyback program. The contact stated that the manufacturer was unable to provide a solution. The contact had not experienced a failure. The contact was concerned about driving the vehicle. VIN tool confirms parts are not available.

Steering on this vehicle failed at less than 40,000 miles. Car is almost uncontrollable and drifts off the road; steering now requires enormous force to maintain a straight course.

I received a recall notice for my 2018 Chevy Bolt and my complaint is in reference to that. It is not a new issue. The remedy suggested by the recall notice is completely unrealistic. To use the car, I have to charge it overnight when I am sleeping. As is the case with almost every other Bolt owner, my charging station is in the garage. So it's unrealistic to (1) avoid depleting below 70 MPH range, (2) park my vehicle outside immediately after charging, and (3) avoid charging the car in my garage overnight. I just want to make sure GM does not escape liability if there is a problem and I did not follow these unrealistic guidelines

Battery fire hazard not resolved. Recommendation from GM to not charge above 90% and not discharge below about 40%, giving an effective range of half of the stated range. Risk that I may need to go below the 40% charge state when travelling, causing fire. I need to charge in my attached garage, posing safety risk to me and family.

My Chevrolet Bolt was subject to the recall for battery problems causing fires, as was described by NSTB above. I took it in for free servicing at Chuck Olson Chevrolet KIA, in Shoreline, WA on July 26, 2021 as directed. (I bought the vehicle new from them). After servicing was completed and supposedly the computer was reset so as not to allow the car to charge beyond 80% of its battery capacity, I took it to a public charger operated by ChargePoint, Inc. at the Woodland Park Zoo in Seattle to charge it. I left it attached to the charger on the assumption that it would shut off electric charge to the vehicle automatically, once it had reached the 80% level. It greatly exceeded this before automatically shutting down when the charge reached a 300 mile range estimate of charge. The vehicle's officially stated charge range estimate is 238 miles. I expect that the recall repair done by Chuck Olson Chevrolet would have prevented this from happening. This action puts my vehicle and me at risk of a serious battery fire problem that was the official reason that NTSB initiated the recall requirement. I would like a clarification of whether the NTSB expected the repair done by Chuck Olson Chevrolet to prevent this, as they may be causing a fire for which they or the manufacturer would be liable.

The battery system has a defect that GM admits could lead to a fire. Since November 2020, they advised me to not charge the car above 90% of capacity. They now are also advising not to discharge below 30%, to not charge overnight, and to park outside once charged. One car fire involved a vehicle that regularly only charged to 75%, so, to be safe, I won't charge to more than 70%. That leaves me with only 40% of my battery (24% in winter). My system in my garage only has power during overnight hours, so no charging overnight means I can't charge my car. GM has a final remedy that involves analyzing the battery for defective modules and installing advanced diagnostic software to detect performance issues before they cause a problem. The huge problem with that remedy is that there have been two fires in cars that had their batteries analyzed and had the diagnostic software installed. That means their system for detecting and preventing fires DOES NOT WORK. In the final remedy, GM will only replace modules that they find are defective. After the remedy work is done, GM says customers can charge their vehicles to 100% with full confidence. If their detection system is faulty, as evidenced by subsequent fires, how can anyone confidently go to sleep at night and charge to 100%? Their detection system relies on software to detect issues. My vehicle has had software problems that include charging to full when only programmed to charge for 2 hours, infotainment system fails to initiate, vehicle fails to recognize key fob, cruise control fails to initiate, touch screen won't respond which prevents operation of all systems controlled through the screen. I have no confidence that GM can detect the known battery defect in modules with 100% certainty. Anything less than 100% means I can't charge my car in my garage and still sleep at night. Also, GM has no idea when final remedy will be ready, and I shouldn't have to live with 40% of my battery for an unknown time.