TonyWilliams
Well-known member
San Diego BMW has one in the showroom.
ss0808 said:My last four cars were bmw's, so it was a no brainer for me. For the same price point, I would jump the bmw loyalty and go to the higher range tesla S if it was available right now.
Interesting thought. Since the EPA numbers are all from the wall, DC QC numbers wouldn't include AC/DC conversion losses.Spies said:I am thinking its the result of a more efficient and/or higher capacity on board charger as well. I do wonder how the Leaf would do efficiency wise if the new Nissan CHAdeMO DC Quick charger were used instead of the onboard charger.muus said:The Focus EV, the ActiveE, the Tesla Roadster and the Mitsubishi i are all more efficient than the Leaf (although only marginally). Hopefully this will change in 2013 with a possibly more efficient charger.
You're also paying for 6 kWh more battery. There's a number of people who would happily pay a premium to get 90+ mi real world range instead of 70+ real world range. Of course, at $60k (if BMW actually sold it) one would probably simply opt for the Model S which has another 8 kWh more than the ActiveE and more usable space.Devin said:7/10ths of a second for an extra $24,000 and less useful passenger/cargo capacity. Sounds like a great tradeoff! :lol:
TonyWilliams said:I drove the BMW ActiveE today and put my name on the list. Apparently, you move up the list with a current J1772.
Yes, I'd love the extra range. I'd miss the quick charge possibility, and any room to put stuff! Bump on hood is ugly, as are the stickers.
What is the charger, 6.6kW ?
San Diego has one on the streets! Looks like it really goes 100 miles!TonyWilliams said:San Diego BMW has one in the showroom.
DeaneG said:Anybody notice what kind of tires BMW is using on the ActiveE? I'll bet they are some low-rolling-resistance Michelin or Conti.
TonyWilliams said:I was told that they were run-flats... no spare, of course.
Shoot, Tony, if the Beemer is going to set you back $60k, why not be a guinea pig for the Coda and keep the $20k you save to buy a Honda Fit or something similar, if the Coda falls apart and/or the company disappears? :roll: The Coda's got the range, storage and back doors you want, although I'm sure the handling would fall short of the BMW and you may need-some No-Doz to keep you awake while approaching the car on foot. :lol:TonyWilliams said:Not sure where I'll end up with cars. I honestly wasn't super impressed with the Beemer, compare to the LEAF. As somebody else said, their LEAF felt more spirited after their BMW test drive, and I agree.
I did not like the herky jerky regen. That would take some getting used to. Limited storage. Nice handling. No back doors for munchkins.
Biggest pluses: significantly bigger battery, twice as fast L2 charging, it's a BMW. I prefer an unlimited mileage lease since I drive a lot.
Plus, there's demand to sell the LEAF, and see what's out there in 2014 at the end of the 24 months.
By the way, I woke up this morning to go to Santa Ana, with the car cleaned up, ready to go. Then I had second thoughts on a probable 17th turtle event, and I just wasn't feeling the love.
So, while brushing my teeth, I decided to bring the Infiniti G37. Then, I started calculated what 170 miles at 18mpg would cost. Yuk.
GRA said:Shoot, Tony, if the Beemer is going to set you back $60k, why not be a guinea pig for the Coda and keep the $20k you save to buy a Honda Fit or something similar, if the Coda falls apart and/or the company disappears? :roll:
We had an opportunity to test drive the ActiveE yesterday at Stevens Creek BMW. The staff was very courteous and I cannot say enough good things about the support team in Ohio as well.
Although we already own a Leaf, we were very excited about the vehicle. Some of our expectations were met, some were exceeded, and others fell short.
My biggest disappointment was the energy economy we achieved during our trip. Granted, it would take a while to get acquainted with the car and figure out how to drive it efficiently. The ActiveE has better EPA fuel economy than the Leaf, so it must be possible.
To be clear, we pushed it on the freeway, and went up to 80 mph. However, at least 30% of the distance we covered was on city streets, and 2.8 miles per kWh looked awfully low to me. I don't believe that I have received a readout this low on the Leaf, even when I was gunning it on the freeway. The weather was mild and we drove on flat roads.
The other disappointment was the white color, but I'm sure that we are not the first ones to point that out. The third disappointment was the projected range. It was 83 miles in Eco/Pro mode at the beginning of the trip, with 98% charge. I suspect that efficient and consistent driving would go a long way to improve this.
We were very impressed with the handling of the car and its rugged robustness. It did not have the econobox feeling the Leaf projects to the driver. It was nice to have fully adjustable seats, telescoping steering wheel, seat warmers and leather.
The star of the show was the SOC meter with a percentage display on the eDRIVE screen. There was a battery temperature display in Fahrenheit instead of some amorphous bars as well. Well done!
If I had to nitpick, I would point out that Nissan did a few things right too. The turning signal sound and windshield wipers seem to be more quiet in the Leaf. I also noticed some wind noise on the freeway, which is hardly detectable in the Leaf. I believe that Nissan went to great lengths to make the passenger cabin very quiet. The only thing where they fell short with is the electric motor with its constant high-pitched whine. This was much less audible in the ActiveE, presumably because the motor's location in the rear.
Folks that had the opportunity to test drive the Model S said that Tesla was able to completely eliminate the motor whine. Although this seems like an unimportant detail, I noticed and appreciated this.
Overall, a very competent EV, pretty good for a conversion car. We didn't want to return the keys to the dealer after the test drive.
Tony, good on you to register! I was surprised to see that AeroVironment was selected as BMW's partner, I had a strong sense of deja vu. As Leaf owners, it's relatively easy to get a waiver, since most of us have home charging stations already. Be warned however; they expect us to have 7.2 kW EVSEs, and there are reportedly only six approved stations.TonyWilliams said:What to expect on the call:
An AeroVironment Certified Installer will be able to verify that your existing charging station can charge the BMW ActiveE. The installer will also be able to answer any questions and discuss the charging experience you can expect from using your current charger.
surfingslovak said:Tony, good on you to register! I was surprised to see that AeroVironment was selected as BMW's partner, I had a strong sense of deja vu. As Leaf owners, it's relatively easy to get a waiver, since most of us have home charging stations already. Be warned however; they expect us to have 7.2 kW EVSEs, and there are reportedly only six approved stations.TonyWilliams said:What to expect on the call:
An AeroVironment Certified Installer will be able to verify that your existing charging station can charge the BMW ActiveE. The installer will also be able to answer any questions and discuss the charging experience you can expect from using your current charger.
surfingslovak said:My biggest disappointment was the energy economy we achieved during our trip. Granted, it would take a while to get acquainted with the car and figure out how to drive it efficiently. The ActiveE has better EPA fuel economy than the Leaf, so it must be possible.
I looked at the specs of run-flats - looks like you'll pay a 5-7 lb weight penalty per tire for the benefit.TomT said:Yep, BMW uses run-flats on virtually everything these days...
The gauges in the car are not to be trusted. At least in the LEAF they appear to be consistent most of the time - but who knows how accurate they are. We have been assuming that the mi/kWh numbers the car gives are based on the energy that comes out of the battery because the 85% difference in wall to dash numbers is a reasonable amount of charging/extraction loss.Herm said:That MPGe from the EPA is a big crock of c**p, it measures WALL-to-wheel efficiency for an $0.11 per kwh fuel when what we really are interested in is battery-to-wheel efficiency for range reasons.surfingslovak said:My biggest disappointment was the energy economy we achieved during our trip. Granted, it would take a while to get acquainted with the car and figure out how to drive it efficiently. The ActiveE has better EPA fuel economy than the Leaf, so it must be possible.
The EPA numbers give you an estimated efficiency and range based on their test drive protocol. Your mileage may vary.Herm said:Pre-heating while plugged in will lower your EPA MPGe, but in practice it increases your range.. its a fairly useless number unless you generate your electricity by pedaling on a generator.
Enter your email address to join: