Connect with us

News

What does a Tesla Model S owner think of the Chevy Bolt? (Full review)

Published

on

Southern California Tesla Model S owner Alex Venz was recently given 24-hour access to a Chevy Bolt with the stipulation that he not drive it more than 100 miles. After his time with the car was up, Alex put together a lengthy video that explores the Bolt and highlights some of its pluses and minuses.

For starters, Alex found the Bolt was somewhat smaller than the Nissan LEAF he used to own. He calls it larger than a Ford Fiesta but smaller than a Ford Focus. His first impression is that the seats are somewhat narrow. In fact, they measure about 17 inches wide. A quick check on his Model S finds those seats are about 20 inches wide, as are the seats in a Honda Accord he had access to. So the Bolt is a little tight when it comes to hip room.

Head room is another story. The Bolt has more front and rear head room than the Model S. Venz, who says he is 5′ 9″ finds he has almost no headroom in the back seat of his Model S but about 3 inches of clearance in the Bolt. Front headroom in the Bolt is about double what he has in his Model S.

Luggage capacity is also significantly greater in the Tesla. The Bolt can handle three moderate size carry on bags, but with little to no room left over. The rear seats of the Bolt do fold flat, however. Lenz says there’s not enough room to actually lie down in back with the seats folded, but there is enough room for lots of cargo if the rear seats aren’t needed for passengers.

Advertisement

The Bolt takes about 2 seconds more to get to 60 mph than Lenz’s Model S 70 but the time required is still around 7 seconds, which is fairly quick in comparison to most in-category cars with internal combustion engines. The quality of interior materials is adequate, Lenz finds, and he notes that the Bolt has fewer squeaks and rattles than his Model S.

Checking out the car’s controls, Venz found the Bolt comes up short when it comes to ease of operation. The touchscreen is customizable, but requires far more effort to drill down through the available menus than the Tesla does. The Bolt also has no built in navigation function for route planning or finding charging locations. Instead, Bolt drivers will have to rely on apps or the mapping functions provided by Apple Car Play or Android Auto. Neither map program is as fully featured as what Tesla offers.

Venz notes that CCS quick charging is a $750 option. Without it, the Bolt can only be charged at either 8 or 12 amps from a household outlet, or roughly 3 miles of range per hour of charge. Just as with the Chevy Volt, 8 amps is the default setting. The driver must manually select the 12 amp setting every time, which is tedious. The car also is programmed to do a 100% charge every time. There is no way to select a lesser charging level.

Update: In the comments to this post, several people took issue with Venz’s information on charging. This comes from GreenMonkeyPants: “Untrue. without the CSS option, there’s a standard J1772 that will charge at 32A @240V.” Further information may be obtained from the website Chevy EV Life

Advertisement

The ride and handling of the Bolt are described as good. The car is responsive and nimble in a way the Model S, being considerably larger, is not. Venz does praise the regenerative braking feature built into the Bolt, which he says permits one pedal driving. The regen is available even with a full battery and can be boosted with a paddle mounted low and on the left side of the steering wheel.

Venz’s conclusion is that the Bolt is an excellent car for someone who will use it primarily for commuting. It has more than adequate range for most people, it is comfortable, and fun to drive. The seating position is higher than in the Model S and is more like what a driver would expect in a crossover SUV than a sedan. That’s a big plus for a lot of drivers.

On balance, Venz feels the Bolt is one of the best products to come from Chevrolet in quite some time. Comparing prices and functions with the Model S, the Bolt is a good car for the money and may actually be better suited to the way ordinary people drive on a daily basis than the Model S.

That’s not the whole story, of course. The real test will be how the Chevy Bolt stacks up against the Model 3. Most people expect the Tesla midsize car to be more refined and offer a higher level of technology than the Bolt. The Chevrolet product has lane keeping assist, blind spot warnings, and automatic emergency braking available but nothing similar to the Autosteer or TACC features available in the Tesla. The Model 3 will be capable of full autonomous driving; the Bolt is not. It will be interesting to see how the two cars compare when both are available to consumers.

Advertisement

"I write about technology and the coming zero emissions revolution."

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla piggybacks recent Supercharger feature with update that takes it further

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla has introduced an enhanced visualization in its Supercharger navigation system, building directly on the Site Maps feature rolled out a few months ago.

This latest software update adds detailed 3D icons that represent specific vehicle models parked at charging stalls, offering drivers a more precise view of site occupancy and layout.

The Site Maps debuted in Tesla’s 2025 Holiday Update, providing 3D overviews of select Supercharger locations with real-time stall availability.

Tesla supplements Holiday Update by sneaking in new Full Self-Driving version

Advertisement

Drivers could see which spots were open, occupied, or out of service when navigating to supported stations.

Now, the system takes this capability further by rendering accurate representations of Tesla vehicles, including distinctions between models such as the Model 3, Model Y, Model S, Model X, and Cybertruck. These icons appear as lifelike 3D renderings, complete with recognizable shapes and proportions that match the actual cars charging at the site:

This refinement improves the user experience during road trips and daily charging stops. As drivers approach a Supercharger, the navigation display now shows not just generic occupied markers but identifiable vehicle types plugged into each stall.

Blue indicators highlight active charging sessions, while other visual cues denote availability or maintenance status. The feature integrates seamlessly with the existing map interface, allowing quick assessment of the best available spot based on vehicle size and positioning.

Tesla continues to expand the availability of these detailed Site Maps across its global network. Initially piloted at a limited number of locations, the rollout has progressed steadily, with more stations gaining support in recent software versions.

Advertisement

Owners benefit from better planning, as the system helps identify compatible stalls and reduces uncertainty upon arrival. The update reflects Tesla’s ongoing commitment to refining its navigation and charging ecosystem through iterative software improvements.

In addition to model-specific icons, the enhanced maps maintain all prior functionalities, such as integration with nearby amenities and energy usage predictions. This ensures a comprehensive tool for efficient Supercharging.

As Tesla’s fleet grows and the network scales, such features play a key role in optimizing the overall ownership experience. Future updates may extend similar visualizations to additional sites and incorporate even more data points for drivers.

With this piggyback enhancement, Tesla demonstrates how small but thoughtful additions can elevate an already useful tool, making Supercharger visits smoother and more informed for its customers. The company is expected to broaden the feature’s reach in upcoming releases, further solidifying its leadership in EV charging infrastructure.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.3 driver monitoring: We tested it

Published

on

Credit: TESLARATI

Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.3 driver monitoring was reportedly scaled back in recent releases, but a new version that was released in the early hours of June 3 aimed to do a better job of keeping those in control of their cars honest, according to release notes.

The release notes for FSD v14.3.3, via Software Version 2026.14.6.7 added:

“Improved driver monitoring system sensitivity with better eye gaze tracking, eye wear handling, and higher accuracy in variable lighting conditions.”

However, Tesla said this was already enabled in the first rollout of FSD v14.3.3 in late May. We tested it anyway, especially as the Standard Speed Profile seemed less-than-worried about what you were doing during operation.

Advertisement

I decided to try out the Hurry and Mad Max Speed Profiles for this test, and it gave me results that I would have expected. Tesla has evidently ramped up driver monitoring based on the Speed Profile you are using to travel.

The more aggressive the Speed Profile, the more on the hook you will be for taking your attention away from the road. Our testing showed that Mad Max was less likely to allow you to do normal things like change music or adjust navigation without getting an on-screen warning or nag from the driver monitoring system.

Hurry Mode Results

On Hurry, the driver monitoring system on FSD v14.3.3, via Software Version 2026.14.6.7, was more restrictive than Standard but less restrictive than Mad Max. I found that I could scroll through music options for a considerable amount of time, more than 30 seconds:

Standard gave me about 80 seconds of phone scrolling with absolutely no nags or warnings in a previous test. It is worth noting that this was a previous branch of v14.3.3, but Standard is such a goodie-two-shoes on the road that it is my impression it would not change much.

Mad Max Results

I spent the majority of the drive on Mad Max to see how it truly reacted to the driver having their attention elsewhere. While I did do a short phone test, I am aiming to steer away from those and use the center screen. I think it is a valid criticism that the phone test is dangerous and, not to mention, illegal in Pennsylvania. Changing the navigation and music is a more reasonable, more responsible, and safer test.

With Mad Max being the fastest and most aggressive Speed Profile, I anticipated this being the quickest mode to give me an alert that I needed to look at the road. That was the case with music:

As well as adjusting Navigation, when I received two nags:

These nags were more than reasonable, and I think it’s probably good that Tesla is ramping up the driver monitoring. I do believe that it should be relatively strict across all of the Speed Profiles, especially with phone use. When using the center screen, the nag intervals should be based on the speed profile you are utilizing at the time.

These driver monitoring adjustments are a great thing to have while FSD is still under its “Supervised” moniker, but I expect Tesla to continue pushing the limits on what it will allow, especially considering CEO Elon Musk has hinted that phone use is capable with the more recent versions.

You can watch the full drive on YouTube below:

Advertisement

 

Continue Reading

News

Tesla responds to Robotaxi skeptics with a massive move in Austin

Published

on

Credit: @AdanGuajardo/X

Tesla has responded to the skeptics of its Robotaxi program by launching a massive expansion of the unsupervised program in its initial rollout city of Austin.

The company’s geofence, the enabled area of operation for rides, now covers the entire Austin Metropolitan area, an incredible move just days after media headlines attempted to discredit the ride-hailing service.

Those who have access to the Tesla Robotaxi app on their smartphones can now request a ride in any portion of the Austin Metro area. The company confirmed this on the social media platform X:

This is Tesla’s fifth expansion of the geofence, with the others occurring in July, early August, late August, and late October 2025. It has remained at that size since October 26, but Tesla has now more than doubled that size.

It is now covering the entire area, including suburbs like Pflugerville and Manor, as well as I-35 highways, Gigafactory Texas, and the Austin-Bergstrom Airport.

The move comes just days after various media outlets highlighted the small fleet size of Tesla’s Robotaxi fleet in Austin, something that is a reasonable criticism but an understandable move on the company’s part to prioritize safety.

Advertisement

Tesla expands Robotaxi geofence, but not the garage

Tesla has expanded its Robotaxi geofence many times, but its fleet has remained at a relatively conservative size as the company continues to push safety as its most crucial metric.

The latest expansion is a key indicator of Tesla’s comfort level to expand the ride-hailing service. The move shows Tesla is scaling unsupervised autonomy, as it demonstrates that the company’s Full Self-Driving system has reached sufficient reliability for a broader real-world deployment, which is something the company has worked on extensively.

It also shows Tesla is game for a competition with its rivals in the autonomous ride-hailing sector. Tesla has often matched or exceeded competitors like Waymo in coverage area, despite its smaller fleet. This step highlights Tesla’s iterative, data-driven progress toward a high-margin, app-based Robotaxi network.

Advertisement

It’s not the absolute largest area expansion ever, but achieving full unsupervised operations across a major metro is a key moment in the Robotaxi story. It shifts the program from limited pilot/testing toward a more mature commercial service, while gathering the miles needed for faster growth.

Continue Reading