Ignore the ugly swirls and... well... it's still ugly. Why can't anyone other than Tesla make an attractive EV?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
BMW i
- Thread starter dpeilow
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Electric Vehicles
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
tommolog
Member
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder I guess. I think it's a pretty nice looking hatchback. It could use some more range, but I definitely don't find it ugly. This picture is about 95% of how the production i3 will look:
Hank42
Legacy Supporter
Adm
Active Member
fengshui
Member
The pictures I've seen of the i3 seem to go back and forth between a 3-door and a 5-door hatchback. Does anyone know if they've finalized on one or the other, or if they're going to offer both?
They're going to offer both, as far as I know (both are presented on the BMW website, the i3 and the i3 coupe).
tommolog
Member
The 5 door hatchback is what will be offered at the launch which for Europe will be in November and January 2014 in the US. The 3 door coupe has not been officially confirmed for production and as of now it's only a concept. If BMW does offer it, I don't expect it would be within the first year though and 2015 would probably be the earliest it would be available. I do think they will eventually offer it though because BMW has received a lot of positive feed back on it.
ipdamages
Roadster Sport 835
I agree that the swirls aren't very flattering, but other than that I like it. Do you think that rust-colored car in the pic Tom posted is unattractive, Doug? Count me in the "thumbs up" club - as it pertains to the i3's looks. I also think the i8 is quite attractive.
As for the i3's other features, I am very disappointed in the 150km range, but at least they plan to offer a range extender. With that, I think it is very compelling, and I can see it taking big market share from the Volt and Leaf. And in four years when the Gen 3 comes out we will see what the marketplace looks like then.
As to your comment about only Tesla knowing how to design attractive EVs, I have to disagree with that. I find the i8 much more appealing to me than the Model S, which, as I have repeatedly posted, I find to be a bit bland and similar to other cars, as well as painfully large/wide. Other attractive EVs expected to be in the market this year include the Concept One, and the Detroit Electric SP-01 is also very easy on the eyes. And the Mercedes SLS AMG Electric is also a looker.
2014 Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG Electric Drive Photos and Info Car and Driver
I certainly don't think that Tesla has the market cornered on attractive body styles in EVs. On the lower side of the price range, I think the Audi A3 e-tron is nice too, though it remains to be seen whether it actually makes it to market in 2014.
Audi A3 e-tron unveiled | Auto Express
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
The i8 is a hybrid, the AMG is a conversion, and the A3 is ok but certainly nothing special in the looks department. I'd say your examples rather make the point that so far only Tesla is making an attractive EV. And Rimac.
CyberDutchie
Active Member
I visited the BMW Welt in Munich, Germany on Monday and they have both cars on display. The i8 is a very stunning looking car, but it's clearly a concept. Very futuristic, tron-like car. I can see this car on the road 10 years from now but i can assure you the production model will not look anything like this when it hits the market in a couple of years.
Here are some pics:
ipdamages
Roadster Sport 835
Are EV conversions not EVs? I think there are a LOT of people who would like an EV that is shaped just like the ICEs they know and love. For many, the challenge is creating an EV that is otherwise not distinguishable from an ICE. So I say a successful EV conversion definitely counts. Like, say... the Tesla Roadster? Does that qualify as an EV?
And the Detroit Electric. Doesn't that qualify? I think that car is fantastic in appearance. Better than the Tesla Roadster I own and love.
Technically hybrids don't qualify under Doug's comment. But I think they are absolutely relevant, and if they can be designed to accomodate a battery AND an ICE, and do so in a form that people like, that to me is even more impressive. So huge kudos to BMW. We will see how their cars perform, but I like the looks.
But my point was simpler. Sweeping generalities like the suggestion that only Tesla can design an attractive EV, given that taste is so individual and there are many examples of other EVs that aren't the LEAF, are not the kind of posts I would expect from the moderator of this sub-forum.
- - - Updated - - -
I think the i8 in the video a couple pages back looked pretty close to production-ready.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Moderators are allowed to have opinions too. Certainly conversions count as EV's, but since the styling came from the ICE you can't really say anyone designed it as an attractive EV, it just looks the same as the ICE design. Hybrids aren't relevant when discussing the styling of EV's any more than the styling of ICE's would be, different classes of vehicles.
ipdamages
Roadster Sport 835
(1) Me. I'm glad there are conversions in the marketplace, but I wanted an original-from-manufacturer-as-EV vehicle not an aftermarket born again EV.
(2) Me. Of course I wouldn't say it that way because I don't consider it an EV if it's not "only EV".
Since EV's are expensive, people who can afford them are picky. Most are not going to settle for something that is meh, AND expensive. An EV doesn't have an ICE, therefore that's an entirely different market altogether. Trying to lump hybrids with EV's only creates confusion.
That wasn't a fanboy comment. It was more a matter of frustration - and a challenge to do better (not that a manufacturer would listen to me). Also my comment pertained to production vehicles, not concept cars. When was the last time you saw a concept that actually made it to production, which looked even remotely like the original? You really think anyone is going to be able to buy an i8 that looks even remotely like that concept? It is good to see that they are trying to dress up the i3 a bit.
Detroit Electric hasn't built a production car - they're still in the vaporware phase. Unfortunately Fisker no longer makes cars. Rimac has a pretty cool car, but it doesn't qualify as being in serial production - they are hand-building a very small number.
Gasoline hybrids don't interest me, as they aren't powered by electricity. Many of them look like regular cars, because they are regular cars.
On the plug-in hybrid side, the only car currently in serial production that I think is reasonably attractive is the Volt/Ampera. I expect that to change as GM transitions more of their vehicles over.
The thing is, the more electric you get, the more the cars look like weird little pods. The Leaf is probably the most attractive (non-Tesla) pure EV on the market, and many people still think it's weird looking. The rest really are weird. Maybe the upcoming Infiniti will look okay, but we'll see.
My point is, there seems to be some weird correlation between "greener" and "goofier". That really isn't helping the transition to electric drive at all.
ipdamages
Roadster Sport 835
And there are some customers who are like you, who apparently will only consieder a from-scratch EV, and not one based on a chassis that has been used in an ICE. But while you are a purist, I sense that many more in the market would consider an EV that has a body design and chassis that have been used in an ICE. That said, I think that in time the market may come to appreciate the unique elements that become available with a from-scratch EV can offer (e.g., those unique to the skateboard). But as of today I don't think that many people would say they refuse to consider an EV if it is based on an ICE. Instead, I think they would evaluate it on its merits, and if it had ICE roots but was well-designed as an EV, then it would be successful.
Lots of people in the world. Lots of unique demands and requirements. But that doesn't mean an EV that has its roots in an ICE isn't an EV, and that isn't what Doug said in the quote from so long ago in now seems.
Again, different people have different opinions. So if the Model S had an option with a range extender, then does that mean the Model S is not an EV? That seems nonsensical. It would be a car that was available in EV and EVER (or EREV, or REx, or whatever you want to call it) versions, but the body style of the Model S would still be a consideration - even in the EVER version. It looks like the i3 is going to be available with and without a range extender. So does the i3 qualify in your book as an EV? As I wrote previously, Doug was comparing the i3 with the range extender to Teslas and saying that only Tesla can make an attractive EV, given that he found the i3 with range extender to be unattractive.
Perhaps my question would have been better-written as "And who says 'I'm looking for an EV, but not if it has a version available with a range extender.'?." I still don't see a big difference there.
I agree with your first point - at least as it pertains to the Model S, and it is because I think the Model S is meh, and huge, that I don't own one. But I'm not sure that is the so much the case for the market for the i3, and not so much for people who are highly focused on getting an EV but are willing to make compromises because they really like the advantages of the EV. If that were the case I see no reason that anyone would have ever bought a LEAF. Or leased the Active E, given its limited storage and limited range. I see lots of people making compromises.
As to your point on the confusion of lumping the sub-markets together, I agree that it is confusing. Just like the real world. People have lots of choices, and the distinctions are more blurred every day. But drawing these lines is only really meaningful to the extent that the market draws those distinctions. And for some those lines are meaningful - like posters on this forum. But that doesn't mean that's how the rest of the world sees things.
Anything with an ICE onboard is a hybrid. I wouldn't have even considered the i3 because of that reason, among many. Most people I talk to(Tesla Time), are so wowed by the range on the S, they almost always comment on how simple the Model S drivetrain is(no spark plugs, oil changes, alternator, starter, exhaust and so on), and how much more room you get without going to a hybrid like the Volt. Most of them ask why the other manufacturers have to include an ICE. These are ordinary folks, who drive ordinary ICE cars, and have never heard of Tesla.
Auto manufacturers know that simplicity equals less profit, and act accordingly. That's one of the many reasons why there is such a reluctance to kick the ICE habit.
Similar threads
