BMW Active E

[tommolog]

Tom, have you had any noticeable loss in pack capacity?

I keep very detailed data logs. I've recorded data from every charging interval (I've charged it 1,353 times so far). I think I'm starting to see a little degradation but not much, maybe 2-4%. I really haven't crunched the numbers lately but as recent as a few months ago there was really no noticeable range reduction. It seems the cold weather is effecting it a little more than it did in the past, but like I said I need to really crunch the numbers before I can definitively say.

 

[smorgasbord]

The i3 will be available for sale in September 2013, at the latest October...

I'll be surprised and impressed if BMW keeps to that schedule.

Thanks, everyone, for the information on BMW's EV plans. It does seem like they're more committed than it had previously appeared to me.

 

[vfx]

"Can anyone explain why BMW feels they need so many field trials (mini-E and now active-E)? What are they learning from these that companies like Tesla and Nissan, who are actually putting models out people can buy, are missing?

"

The Mini and Active Es are for CARB. California BMW sales were always under the number of units sold (60,000?) that qualifies them as a major manufacturer. They did not have to have as many credits to clean cars.
Then when the started selling Minis that put them over the top. They asked for a waiver but was denied. Leasing EVs gives you the CARB credits, the green cred (and at the outrageous prices they were charging a nice profit to boot) and at the same time they don't have to service the cars forever. It's a win win for them.

 

[VolkerP]

To fulfil CARB and CAFE regulations, leases should disqualify. Only cars sold. To improve the chances that these few "alibi" cars really are on the road for their usable lifetime - not just 3 years lease, expired, reposessed, and destroyed. :cursing:

 

[Lloyd]

To fulfil CARB and CAFE regulations, leases should disqualify. Only cars sold. To improve the chances that these few "alibi" cars really are on the road for their usable lifetime - not just 3 years lease, expired, reposessed, and destroyed. :cursing:

Actually only a 2 year Lease!!

The Details
$2,250 Down
$499 a Month*
$0 Maintenance1
2-year, closed-end lease

 

[tommolog]

CARB does have loopholes that should be filled, I agree 100%. They shouldn't let Tesla sell their credits to Honda so Honda doesn't have to make EV's either. I much prefer a program like BMW's where they're actually making and leasing EV's over another company just buying someone else's excess credits, wouldn't you?

I got my MINI-E in June 2009 and now I'll be getting an ActiveE for the next 24 months. BMW took me off gas for good over 30 months ago. Nobody except Tesla offered any of their customers an electric alternative in 2009. Sure there were only 612 made, but don't think for a minute BMW made money on this project(someone wrote "and at the outrageous prices they were charging a nice profit to boot"). They did get the valuable CARB credits but the each car cost them over $75,000 to make and service and we didn't even pay 1/4 of that in lease fees. Heck, we didn't even cover the cost of the batteries in our cars with the lease payments.

Yes, one of the reasons of the program was the CARB credits, but everybody tries to game the system, that's CARB's fault for letting them. I'd still prefer a program like this where the cars drove over 9,000,000 EV miles compared to buying someone else's credits. This exposed hundreds of people to EV's that never had the opportunity to drive one and now many of them are hooked and will move on to Volts, LEAFS and certainly Teslas.

 

[GSP]

"I got my MINI-E in June 2009 and now I'll be getting an ActiveE for the next 24 months. BMW took me off gas for good over 30 months ago."

That was great for people that had that opportunity, and I am very glad you did. However from the perspective of someone who was excluded from the Mini-E club by BMW, this just left a bad taste in my mouth, very much like not being able to ever buy an EV1, even on the used market.

Tesla, GM, Nissan, Mitsubihi, did not exclude me from the EV club (this time around anyway), so my heart, and dollars, go to them.

GSP

 

[AnOutsider]

I honestly don't mind the credits trading and selling. The right thing is still being done, just those that are doing more of it are helping to offset those who are doing less. It's like offsetting your carbon consumption.

 

[Norbert]

They shouldn't let Tesla sell their credits to Honda so Honda doesn't have to make EV's either.

As long as the amount they have to pay, is large enough, I think it is a great thing if Tesla gets money from non-EV companies. Even if that doesn't speak in favor of Honda. It'll help Tesla finance the Bluestar project. Out of all the EV projects I've heard about, I'd consider this the most important one. Tesla getting money it can use for Bluestar may be more worthwhile than Honda launching a half-hearted CARB project.

 

[EVNow]

I too had felt cheated out of Mini-E, but as Tom says, there were hundreds who got exposed to EVs and they have become good will ambassadors for EVs. This is definitely a good outcome.

We now have a bunch of CARB play EVs hitting California next year. We can either look at it as a fraud or say that Honda & Toyota wouldn't have given the minimal support but for CARB. Let us not forget Tesla has benefitted from both Honda, who bought the credits, and from Toyota's RAV4EV program.

The EV movement is a difficult one - we have to convert one driver at a time - one OEM at a time (however haltingly).

 

[vfx]

Anyone know how much a CARB credit costs and how much value a lease-only car like the AE is to them?

 

[Doug_G]

CARB does have loopholes that should be filled, I agree 100%. They shouldn't let Tesla sell their credits to Honda so Honda doesn't have to make EV's either. I much prefer a program like BMW's where they're actually making and leasing EV's over another company just buying someone else's excess credits, wouldn't you?

Not at all. It helps support Tesla, so great. Honda isn't making any investment in EV technology, so they will probably go out of business when the big change comes. So be it; it's their risk.

 

[TEG]

Anyone know how much a CARB credit costs and how much value a lease-only car like the AE is to them?

I vaguely recall hearing something like $5K. I am not sure if that is one time or per year. Also, I think it depends on how desperate a particular big-auto maker is for them. I think the vehicle provides CARB compliance each year it is in service whether leased or sold. Leasing probably makes it easier to keep track of them being in service and prove documentation in case the total is ever called into question. (Although CARB can probably track all the ZEVs based on DMV renewals.)

 

[Norbert]

I vaguely recall hearing something like $5K. I am not sure if that is one time or per year. Also, I think it depends on how desperate a particular big-auto maker is for them. I think the vehicle provides CARB compliance each year it is in service whether leased or sold. Leasing probably makes it easier to keep track of them being in service and prove documentation in case the total is ever called into question. (Although CARB can probably track all the ZEVs based on DMV renewals.)

Surely then the amount of credits, which Honda might be buying from Tesla, aren't the only thing that determines the situation for Honda ?!?

 

[TEG]

Lest we hijack this BMW Active E thread, perhaps you should just go off and read these:
Zero-Emission Vehicle Regulations Get Tougher for 2012 - Feature - Car and Driver

...Automakers that don’t sell that many ZEVs must buy “pure” ZEV credits from other manufacturers. Credits expire after three years...

...The value of selling ZEV credits, however, will diminish as new ZEVs hit the market. This is one reason Tesla supported an even stricter mandate that CARB proposed, then abandoned, back in 2008. Nissan might single-handedly meet the existing 2015 mandate with Leaf sales alone, and could flood the market with credits, thereby drastically reducing the worth of a single ZEV credit...

Toyota (surprise!) leads the pack in CARBs ZEV credit list

 

[tommolog]

I vaguely recall hearing something like $5K. I am not sure if that is one time or per year. Also, I think it depends on how desperate a particular big-auto maker is for them. I think the vehicle provides CARB compliance each year it is in service whether leased or sold. Leasing probably makes it easier to keep track of them being in service and prove documentation in case the total is ever called into question. (Although CARB can probably track all the ZEVs based on DMV renewals.)

It's gotta be more than 5k per vehicle. I think Honda paid over 12 million last year for their credits.

 

[vfx]

It's gotta be more than 5k per vehicle. I think Honda paid over 12 million last year for their credits.

If true, the value to each CA BMW "E" just went way up for them.

 

[neroden]

OK, I wasn't following the market that closely -- I'll believe BMW is serious.

They're still making a Leaf clone. That puts them a couple of years behind. Nissan made some serious mistakes in the first year's model, but they seem to have corrected the cold-weather issue, and they'll have improved the charger by the time BMW is on the market....

...and BMW is making the same error on range which Nissan made, the one where only Tesla is actually making long-range cars. BMW isn't even making Nissan's move to install DC chargers everywhere, which puts it behind Nissan. Tesla continues to have zero competition in the outside-the-big-city market.

So I'll believe they're serious, but I still don't think they're competent with electric cars. There's probably room for at least three electric car makers, so they may do OK despite moves of questionable business sense, I suppose.

 

[surfingslovak]

BMW isn't even making Nissan's move to install DC chargers everywhere, which puts it behind Nissan. Tesla continues to have zero competition in the outside-the-big-city market.

You raise some very valid points. If I recall correctly, BMW wanted to offer a range-extender option on the i3, which would make it viable beyond the commuter and city car use case.

 

[EVNow]

...and BMW is making the same error on range which Nissan made, the one where only Tesla is actually making long-range cars.

I don't know whether nissan made a mistake - range isn't free.

But, being a more expensive car, i3 should have had more range. I'll probably not get i3 because of smaller range. I want more range for winter.