BMW i3

[gene]

This is from an investor's thread but seems relevant here:

Originally Posted by gene
I absolutely agree with FANGO. We should wish well to all EV's that come along. There is plenty of market to steal from the ICE vehicles for all EV newcomers. Most city car EV owners are very likely to discover how much they love driving EV and will trade up to Tesla quite soon. There are 3 Leafs in my neighborhood and I can say that all three of these drivers will have Teslas soon enough. Imagine if every car on your block was a Leaf, 500e or i3. Within 2 years at least 1/2 of those would be upgraded to Teslas. I wish i3, Leaf, 500e, Spark etc..the very best of sales!

As people see EV's from many companies, they will warm to the idea, the ICE cars will appear archaic to the general public, and everyone's EV sales will go up, especially Tesla. I, for one, always wave/nod even talk to the owners of other EV's. We are ambassadors for Tesla, better we welcome all EV's rather than seem snobby.

 

[anticitizen13.7]

It's just a really unpleasant looking car. I don't want to be shallow, but I don't think I could bring myself to drive something that looked like that.

The comments I've seen on the web have been absolutely brutal towards the i3's outside design: comparisons to the Honda Element and obligatory likening to the Pontiac Aztek. The maddening thing is that BMW didn't have to design it this way.

I guess it kind of defines hipster mobile (the somewhat affluent edition)…

I could drive it. But it would have to have more range than all the other alternatives… And it would only be because of lack of alternatives.

Hipsters don't drive cars ;-). Single-speed bike or walk! But seriously, I would rather drive a Volt than the i3.

 

[wcalvin]

Looked to me that the front crumple zone consists of the drivers' legs. Are there no standards about such safety issues?

 

[SwedishAdvocate]

Looked to me that the front crumple zone consists of the drivers' legs. Are there no standards about such safety issues?

Image Credit: BMW?

 

[VolkerP]

Hey guys,

too much uninformed attack messages in this thread! Hey, we are the EV crowd - always defending against the uninformed anti-EV attack. But when challenged to do it better, failure.

Once the i3 is on the road in significant numbers (late 2015?) ...

A BMW agent claimed 9000 sales up to now to me.

.. it will be interesting to see what happens when the car runs over some nasty metal road debris and if the BMW battery design and software can handle the impact as safely as the Model S does. I suspect that right now BMW is trying to replicate i3 road debris impacts on their test track!

Except that there's one other design difference besides battery chemistry. Tesla's battery is more vulnerable to road debris because of the skateboard platform, which neither the Volt or the Leaf have but the i3 does.

Model S vulnerability is a combination of low ground clearance and low mounted battery pack. BMW i3 has rather high ground clearance and skinny tires. I think that any road debris gets picked up by other cars before an i3 passes the spot.

Looked to me that the front crumple zone consists of the drivers' legs. Are there no standards about such safety issues?

And you base that on... what? Throwing out that BMW might skimp on passenger crash safety is a rather bold accusation.

It is OK to say that you don't like the car, you find the charging architecture lacking, you don't expect the car to handle well when driven hard, that it's half a Tesla for half the money, yada, yada. But cut back the ill stuff, please. You're doing electric revolution a disservice.

</over>

 

[stopcrazypp]

There's only 3 things I don't really like about the i3:
1) The styling is love-or-hate (BMW could have chosen something that looks universally good)
2) It's a city car (they could have went to with a Leaf sized 5 door hatch and it might appeal to more people)
3) The range is disappointing for being a lightweight/small city car and all the carbon fiber (I was hoping it'll be closer to the Active E with almost 100 miles EPA).

I wish it success, but it's not a vehicle I would buy.

 

[Mr X]

Just went for a test drive in it and wow. They have a BMW i Experience test drive set up across the street at the LA Auto Show. There are like hundreds of i3's, all solar orange with the 20' rims.



It is very nice and looks way better in person. It has an incredible amount of power and the regen works flawlessly, comes to a dead stop without having to use the brake, interior is also very nice.

 

[Mr X]

I would rather drive a Volt than the i3.

My dad drives a volt and just test drove the i3 and said he'll happily trade in his volt to get the i3 :wink:

 

[SwedishAdvocate]

I guess it kind of defines hipster mobile (the somewhat affluent edition)…

I could drive it. But it would have to have more range than all the other alternatives… And it would only be because of lack of alternatives.

Hipsters don't drive cars ;-). Single-speed bike or walk! But seriously, I would rather drive a Volt than the i3.

When it comes to things that have a relatively large impact on my CO2-footprint, I’m a function over form kind of guy. My conscience regulates those kinds of choices. Things like whether or not the manufacturer allows workers to freely organize would also be a factor – as would the nature of the owner. I’m not particularly fond of giving my money to the Chinese Communist Party for example…

Thus, if it’s between the i3 and the Volt, the i3 wins due to longer electric range (and it can also be had with a range extender). I also have a feeling the i3 will have a better MPGe number than the Volt…

 

[SwedishAdvocate]

Or like this:

If it good enough for Sienna,

...then it’s good enough for me.


Or like this (no. 2):

If Leo di Caprio, Bradley Cooper, Matt Damon, Will Ferrell[SUP]1[/SUP], Harrison Ford, Tom Hanks, Kate Hudson, Julianne Moore, Natalie Portman, Michelle Rodriguez, ChadS and Efusco can (or could) drive a Prius – then I can drive an i3.


______________________________________________________________
[SUP]1[/SUP]According to Celebrity Cars Blog, Will Ferrell has traded the Prius for a Nissan Leaf.

 

[tommolog]

I was able to take a couple test drives in an i3 at the LA Auto Show this week and speak to a couple of the program managers. I learned some new info and did a blog post on the driving experience and posted some pics. It's far from perfect but I think it's a nice edition to the current EV offerings and should sell reasonably well.

The Electric BMW i3: The LA Auto Show: Driving Impressions & Details Learned

 

[surfingslovak]

 

[jas]

A well done review tommolog. It looks like it has the headroom and ease to get in and out of I was looking for.

 

[nwdiver]

I'd be interested to see this from a marketing angle... Most people seem to agree that the i3 looks... odd but the Prius was also an unusual car, by design. I've read that Toyota thought early adopters wanted to stand out as early adopters so they made the Prius very distinctive. You would think that Tesla had debunked this but maybe not... The optimist in me wants to think BMW had the same plan... my pessimistic side thinks BMW wants the i3 to suffer the same fate GM had planned for the EV1.

Either way, I doubt we'll see a repeat of the EV1 disgrace... If the i3 sells I'm certain BMW will roll out more mainstream EVs just as Toyota gradually introduced hybrid drivetrains into their other vehicles.

 

[stopcrazypp]

The Prius and Leaf had excuses for their styling choices: aerodynamics.

i3's styling choices seem to be just there for styling reasons (for example the contrasting body panels), kind of like the black borders on the bottom of the Volt's windows.

 

[ChadS]

BMW has said multiple times that the i3 is meant to draw in new customers (I even saw them once clarify that they did not expect existing customers to buy it). Like the Leaf, it is intended as a "conquest" car to bring new customers to the brand - without cannibalizing sales of existing cars. They are trying to attract consumers that would otherwise not consider their brand; a key profit-seeking move in a saturated near-commodity market. But they don't expect high profits on the i3, so they want their existing customers to keep buying the higher-margin cars they are already buying. That's the main reason that low-margin cars tend to have poor styling - automakers want to give people a reason to buy a higher-margin car. (A car can be aerodynamic and attractive, like the Model S). They could compromise somewhere other than looks, but they don't want to trash their image with a car that performs poorly - they want the new customers to buy a future car from their brand! Styling is an easy way to tell their regular customers to stay away. (Size and price are other easy mechanisms that some automakers are using).

Part of this is just typical "versioning" that automakers do to try to maximize profits across their entire line. Part of it is specific to EVs, because they know dealers will not want to make a high-effort EV sale to an existing customer if they can more easily sell a gas car to the same customer. Dealers will only try to sell EVs if they bring in MORE customers. So automakers (that are trying at all) try to make their EVs appeal to people that don't currently buy from their brand - while at the same time NOT appealing to brand-loyal customers. It's tough to do; and usually ends up making a lot of people ask "why did they do that?" types of questions.

Of course there are even more complications, like the ZEV credit dance.

I agree that if the i3 does well, and other automakers roll out conquest cars...they may have to give up the conquest idea and try to make a car that appeals to a wide variety of customers, including their current ones. If they are serious about making money rather than just using them for compliance, they will also make the cars available everywhere. And advertise the cars in a way intended to sell the car (as opposed to a lot of current EV marketing, that is instead intended to raise appeal of the brand so they can sell OTHER cars. I'm looking at you, polar bears).

 

[VolkerP]

Very enlightening, Chad.

I now understand BMW's motivation to attract new customers with the i3 while making current BMW customers stick with the high-margin ICE models. But if BMW wants to attract EV customers, why o why did they cripple 2 out of 3 defining points of any EV (range and charging capabilities) so severely? :cursing:
Tom's blog post reports on the driving and performance experience, which seems ok. No chance to experience the range of the car or to charge it on a test drive around the block.

 

[surfingslovak]

But if BMW wants to attract EV customers, why o why did they cripple 2 out of 3 defining points of any EV (range and charging capabilities) so severely?

I think BMW is simply building a 100-mile range car, just like every other major automaker. Since most customers drive about 40 miles a day, they believe this to be plenty of range. The REx will help, but that feature is heavily influenced by new California regulation, which will make it less viable on long trips. Not sure what you mean by limited charging capabilities? Are you referring to the lack of two or three-phase charging on the i3 in Europe? So this leaves the question, has BMW learned from Tesla. I would hope so, but I'm not sure.

 

[ChadS]

The range limitation is part of the ZEV credit dance...they get 3 credits for building a "100-mile" (on a city test, which means about 75 miles on the EPA test) EV. They could get a fourth credit if they add range...but it would have to have twice as much range! Most automakers don't think that's worth doing. And yeah, as surfingslovak notes, the REx is also carefully designed to meet CARB rules to make sure people don't buy the cars to get HOV access and then just burn gas all the time. CARB rules were required to get the cars to market, but the rules were set after CARB listened to automakers testify what sort of limited electric cars were "possible" (i.e., what they would lose the least money on if they built them in the most expensive way, which is in small quantities). I think the CARB rules need some updating; or better yet replacement.

BTW, BMW is taking a different tack with the i8. That one is a halo car, designed to bring people in to the showrooms, where they then sell them a different car. Much like the Cadillac ELR.

 

[Mr X]

Very enlightening, Chad.

I now understand BMW's motivation to attract new customers with the i3 while making current BMW customers stick with the high-margin ICE models. But if BMW wants to attract EV customers, why o why did they cripple 2 out of 3 defining points of any EV (range and charging capabilities) so severely? :cursing:
Tom's blog post reports on the driving and performance experience, which seems ok. No chance to experience the range of the car or to charge it on a test drive around the block.

Of course not but you get an idea of how it drives, and it is very fast. Probably as quick as a 60kw Model S to a certain point.


And the smart electric test drive was the same thing, only a drive around the block. So had to schedule a real test drive with the dealer, and was very pleased.