Tesla BEV Competition Developments

[Oil4AsphaultOnly]

I dunno about "on paper" but in the actual world the i4 is a pig heavy ICE vehicle they slapped some batteries in. It's embarrassingly got a transmission tunnel taking up interior space.

As to actual performance results-

Tested: 2022 BMW i4 M50 Is an EV M3

The new electric 4-series outruns an M3 Competition to 60 mph, and it costs less.

www.caranddriver.com

Meanwhile...

Tested: 2019 Tesla Model 3 Performance Hits 60 in 3.1 Seconds

Tesla's smallest sedan is amusing with more power and better handling.

www.caranddriver.com

The BMW loses in every single test shown above. And note, it appears those Model 3 #s are from after the first free OTA power bump on the Model 3, but not the second one... nowadays for example the Model 3P routinely puts down 11.4s and ~118 in the 1/4 mile, with lots of measured examples on Draggy.


In full disclosure.. The BMW DIES manage to beat the Model 3 on the skid pad by 0.01g

But ultimately it's ~1000 lbs heavier- and it shows.

[/QUOTE]

Check out the drag race video by carwow, the paper specs don't compare correctly. Essentially the i4 is geared for the autobahn and driver reaction times can handicap the m3p. 800lbs of difference will do that.

 

[Cobos]

Tesla range estimates are not realistic. Whereas bmw seems to be much closer to reality. You can see edmunds for a real range comparison. i4 m50 had more real world range than m3p in fact.

Also 0-60 on m3p is with rollout while i4 m50i is without, so the on-paper number is very close. Additionally, many videos out there showing the i4 beats m3p in drag races.

I don't trust Edmunds when it comes to Tesla tests... NAF on the other hand, the Norwegian AAA does very well respected range tests.
Take a look here:

Elbilene sliter med norsk sommervær

Skal en bil i Motor og NAFs elbiltest for første gang klare 70 mil på én lading? Hvor bra er kinesiske Hongqi? Og hva med nye Mercedes EQE? I dag får du svaret. Motor oppdaterer testen minutt for minutt fra klokka 9.

www.motor.no

it shows that yes the BMW M50 does 4,85% better than their official numbers, while the Tesla Model Y LR (the only new to Norwegian market Tesla, the requirement to be in the test) does 7,5% better. So as Knightshade says, it is heavy and inefficient, when it's consumption is bigger than a SUV. As it turns out as well it is around 20% more expensive in Norway for a M50 than a M3P.

 

[Knightshade]

Check out the drag race video by carwow

I have- they're routinely garbage that produce results that get clicks but aren't trustworthy- like the ones where they had a non-performance Model 3 passing a performance one.

, the paper specs don't compare correctly

Those aren't "paper" specs- those are "actually tested the car properly in real life with calibrated measuring devices instead of trying to make $ on youtube with surprising results" specs.

. Essentially the i4 is geared for the autobahn

Then the 127 mph top speed on the BMW is even weirder in addition to be slower through the 1/4 mile which ends at 118-120ish

There's only so much help "gearing" can do for a single-speed transmission in a car 1000 lbs heavier than the other one.

 

[momo3605]

Then the 127 mph top speed on the BMW is even weirder in addition to be slower through the 1/4 mile which ends at 118-120ish

Per the article you sent, the i4 has a faster 1/4 mile trap speed and 50-70 time.

The reason m3p numbers are all over the place is because of things like preconditioning, charge level, etc…if You can make sure your battery is warm enough and close to 100%, it’s possible to knock a quick 0-30 out of the gate, but m3p isn’t competitive after 50 or 60 at all really.

Additionally, I4 will keep doing consistent runs even at 30% SoC. Where the m3p starts getting slower under 80%

 

[Knightshade]

Per the article you sent, the i4 has a faster 1/4 mile trap speed

Speed, not time.

It takes longer to get to the end of the 1/4 mile than the Model 3 Performance does- it's just moving a little quicker when it eventually goes that far.

and 50-70 time.

Uh... no.

BMW:
Rolling start 5-60: 3.5 sec
30-50 mph: 1.5 sec
50-70 mph: 2.0 sec
Top Speed: 127 mph
Braking 70-0: 154 ft
Braking 100-0: 308 ft


Tesla:
Rolling start 5-60: 3.3 sec
30-50L 1.1 sec
50-70: 1.7 sec
Top speed: 162 mph
Braking 70-0: 147 ft
Braking 100-0: 296 ft



Bold added.

The Tesla is quicker (or stops shorter) in every listed performance measure there. All of which were measured by Car and Driver with the same professional drivers and calibrated equipment.

The reason m3p numbers are all over the place is because of things like preconditioning, charge level, etc…if You can make sure your battery is warm enough and close to 100%, it’s possible to knock a quick 0-30 out of the gate, but m3p isn’t competitive after 50 or 60 at all really.

This is outright false on multiple levels.

The most obvious being that even near 120 (end of 1/4 mile) the BMW is still taking longer to get there.

Certainly it might be possible the BMW would catch up and pass the Tesla AFTER the 1/4 mile.

But given it's only 7 mph away from its top speed- I'm not sure it'd do it even then.

And then the Tesla would pull away a second time after 127 since the BMW can't go any faster.


So... I mean, I guess if you want the car that's only quicker between 120 and 127 specifically, the BMW is the way to go.

In every other situation, which is basically 99.9999% of actual real world ones, the Tesla wins.


Further- it appears the BMW, unlike the Tesla, has to be in a special wait-for-it launch control mode to even do its best, slower-than-tesla, numbers

A Launch Control function is included in the new BMW i4. Activating it allows the driver to accelerate with optimum traction with the accelerator pressed to the floor. Torque oscillations when stationary indicate that the drive system is ready for ‘launch’, at which point the full combined output is instantly made available.

Additionally, I4 will keep doing consistent runs even at 30% SoC

<citation needed>



BTW there's a whole separate thread dedicated to how BMW half-arsed this car over here, might be a better place to carry this on since "BMW shoves batteries into an ICE platform" isn't much of a development at this point

M3P VS BMW I4 M50

Can't beat weight, and I believe tesla make the most energy dense batteries (contributes significantly to the lighter weight I'd inagine), still think how fast a 3 would be with the motors from the i4 as it still shifts pretty quick with that extra weight. Probably traction limited as the...

teslamotorsclub.com

 

[Jeff N]

The AP Interview: GM's Barra talks electric vehicles, future

General Motors CEO Mary Barra outlined an ambitious plan for her company to sell more electric vehicles in the U.S. than Tesla by the middle of this decade.

apnews.com

 

[willow_hiller]

The AP Interview: GM's Barra talks electric vehicles, future

General Motors CEO Mary Barra outlined an ambitious plan for her company to sell more electric vehicles in the U.S. than Tesla by the middle of this decade.

apnews.com

I honestly read that headline as "GM's Barra stands by ambiguous EV pledge."

Also, why did they feel the need to lie about the price of the Model 3?

The mainstream vehicle is something Tesla has yet to master. The Model 3 sedan, its lowest-priced vehicle, starts at close to $60,000.

White paint RWD with 18" wheels is $46,990. "Close to $50,000" would have been more accurate.

 

[Jeff N]

White paint RWD with 18" wheels is $46,990. "Close to $50,000" would have been more accurate.

Good point. I notified AP about the error.

 

[willow_hiller]

Good point. I notified AP about the error.

I'm impressed, they did correct it quickly:

The mainstream vehicle is something Tesla has yet to master. A rear-wheel-drive version of the Model 3 sedan, its lowest-priced vehicle, starts around $48,000 with shipping.
...
This story has been corrected to show that the lowest-price Tesla starts around $48,000 including shipping.

Not sure why they needed to include shipping in that calculation, though. Maybe because without shipping, the price of the Model 3 RWD is just a couple thousand shy of the $45,000 average new vehicle price they cite later in the article.

 

[Jeff N]

I'm impressed, they did correct it quickly:

Bonus: I got a nice note back from the AP writer thanking me for pointing out the error.

 

[wdolson]

The AP Interview: GM's Barra talks electric vehicles, future

General Motors CEO Mary Barra outlined an ambitious plan for her company to sell more electric vehicles in the U.S. than Tesla by the middle of this decade.

apnews.com

If they really push hard they might be able to equal Tesla's EV output today, but they won't be able to produce as many EVs as Tesla by 2025 or 2030. They'll be lucky if they are producing as many cars of all types as Tesla by 2030.

 

[Doggydogworld]

GM is known for having fiefdoms that more or less ignore the CEO and do what they want. I appreciate that she's trying, but IMHO she doesn't have the internal clout to bring about the things she promises. I have to believe she at this point they're going to miss that goal by a mile.

By 2025 she'll be the longest tenured GM CEO in at least 50 years. I expect her to retire by then, although she's still only 60.

 

[RobStark]

I think Mary will achieve her GM 2025 production/sales goals no later than 2027.

Where Mary makes a massive mistake is where she thinks Tesla will be in 2025-30.

Ergo, GM will never surpass Tesla in BEV sales in North America.

 

[RobStark]

Curious.

The Cadillac Lyriq has a start/off button.

The reskinned Chevrolet version, the Blazer EV, will not.

I guess GM expects an older customer for the Lyriq that prefers a start/off button.

 

[RobStark]

Ford is really hustling to buy battery cells, including LFP.

 

[RobStark]

 

[Discoducky]

Interesting article and mentions several things I hadn't heard before, but it ends up reading like a plea for an eventual necessary government bailout (guessing 2024 if Tesla continues 50 to 80% CAGR). The narrative, IMHO, reads like "see, we really were trying in 2015 and really trying with the Bolt (even though it was nearly 100% LG drivetrain and BMS) and see, we really have a lot of vehicles in the pipeline to compete with Tesla (even though they are NOT competing with Tesla, due to ever increasing gaps in efficiencies across the board)

GM trails far behind Tesla in EV sales — CEO Mary Barra bet the company that will change

CEO Mary Barra is betting that the electric vehicle platform GM unveiled five years ago will soon help the legacy automaker top its rivals on electric vehicles.

www.cnbc.com

 

[ZsoZso]

The fundamental problem with lagacy auto is that whatever EV they put on the market, it never competes with Tesla, the primary competition is always their own ICE vehicles! The demand for EVs is over 50% of the next vehicle of the buyers according to a recent poll, while supply is below 10% of the market. Until this imbalance is fixed, the competition is not coming for Tesla. New EV models and generally all EV sales are just replacing ICE sales and since Tesla has no ICE sales they are not impacted at all!

 

[wdolson]

The fundamental problem with lagacy auto is that whatever EV they put on the market, it never competes with Tesla, the primary competition is always their own ICE vehicles! The demand for EVs is over 50% of the next vehicle of the buyers according to a recent poll, while supply is below 10% of the market. Until this imbalance is fixed, the competition is not coming for Tesla. New EV models and generally all EV sales are just replacing ICE sales and since Tesla has no ICE sales they are not impacted at all!

That's the existential problem the legacy auto makers have faced with changing over to EVs. If consumer demand for ICE remains high, then they can convert to EVs at a leisurely pace and blame regulators for why EVs are taking over. But if consumers change their tastes and want EVs instead of ICE, then the legacy auto makers have been osbourned. Consumers will continue driving their old car longer until they can get an EV and new ICE will plummet. Then auto makers won't have the cash flow to do the conversion to EVs.

Meanwhile the pure EVs makers have no ICE sales to pirate and they well every car they make at a healthy profit. Great news for Tesla, Rivian, and other pure EV makers and it spells the end for some legacy car makers and almost certain downsizing of the rest. Toyota may still be around in 20 years, but they might be like Kodak, a shell of their former selves.

 

[RobStark]

That's the existential problem the legacy auto makers have faced with changing over to EVs. If consumer demand for ICE remains high, then they can convert to EVs at a leisurely pace and blame regulators for why EVs are taking over. But if consumers change their tastes and want EVs instead of ICE, then the legacy auto makers have been osbourned. Consumers will continue driving their old car longer until they can get an EV and new ICE will plummet. Then auto makers won't have the cash flow to do the conversion to EVs.

Meanwhile the pure EVs makers have no ICE sales to pirate and they well every car they make at a healthy profit. Great news for Tesla, Rivian, and other pure EV makers and it spells the end for some legacy car makers and almost certain downsizing of the rest. Toyota may still be around in 20 years, but they might be like Kodak, a shell of their former selves.

That is not what it is looking like on the ground. Tesla makes healthy profits. Rivian does not.

Ford said they where profitable with Mach-e until recent commodity price increases. Given Mach-e and Lightning demand they have the ability to raise prices.

The legacy automakers have large amounts of unprofitable ICEv sales. Essentially compliance ICEv. GM didn't make money on Cruz or Malibu nor Ford on Fusion or Focus. But GM will be profitable on Lyriq,Blazer EV, Equinox EV, and Silverado EV. Ford can be profitable on Lightning based on which trim levels it choses to make and same with Mach-e. Or they could raise prices. In short Legacy OEMs can replace unprofitable compliance ICEv with profitable premium BEV. And remain CARB CAFE compliant. And equivalent in Europe and China.

I have read Honda loses money on Civic and breaks even on Accord. They start making big money on Pilot, Odyssey and Acura models.