GRA said:
As stated, that's exactly what they did, to allow them to get full credits for a BEV instead of partial credits for a PHEV, in a category they themselves had asked be established, ...
I think you have missed the point. The point is that it was CARB who dictated that a SEV or MSEV (minimal Rex Serial EV) is a bad idea and must not receive full credit. BMW was just reacting to the brainless rules of CARB, pushed by its incompetent and ideological sociology graduates, and was just optimizing given the constraint imposed by CARB. It is NOT BMW at fault. It is CARB at fault. If a city (like my city) converts every other road lane to bicycle-only, and then traffic jams become 5 times worse, can you blame the drivers for not driving on the bike lanes and causing traffic jams? In justice, you go to the source of the injustice and apportion blame. You do not blame the victim. BMW is just dancing to the rules of CARB.
CARB's opinion was that it might make BEVs more acceptable to some people who would otherwise be turned off by their short range and consequent range anxiety, so more would be sold and more miles would be driven electrically. It had just that effect, which as I mentioned is shown by the relative sales proportions of the i3 BEV vs.the REx.
It was just an opinion by CARB and a wrong opinion. It held back the adoption of BEVs because the i3 Rex has little functionality and prevents people from driving intelligently. The huge engine also made the thing unnecessarily expensive and difficult to maintain. So many times I had to suffer due to almost running out of charge with my Leaf, and having to cancel my plans. A minimalist genset, as little as 5 kW or even less that could be turned on at anytime and could charge the EV back to 100% if necessary (i.e. not this bizarre 'hold mode') would have ameliorated range anxiety. Are you not aware that the adoption of BEVs has been extremely anemic? Why do you think it is so anemic? (Range Anxiety)
Now that BEVs with equal or greater range than the REx are available for under $40k, the justification for such a design has faded away to nothing.
Certainly disagree with this. The Leaf2 is only 150 miles of range and that is insufficient. Even the T3.220 does not offer the confidence that on a freezing dark rainy day you will get to your destination that is only an hour and half away. A "backup power" (and not a range extender) will even be needed in a 310 mile range EV.
That some owners would want/need to use their cars in ways that limiting the REx to only come on when the SoC had fallen to 6.5% wouldn't allow was foreseeable, but was considered acceptable by CARB. I thought then and now that anyone willing to spend that kind of money for a PEV would be likely to drive the car to maximize the amount of electric driving they did, so the limitation wasn't needed, but given the amount of PHEV drivers who never use (if they even know) of 'hold' modes, that's not necessarily the case.
You would need to reprogram the Rex to arrive at the silly 'hold mode' which is only at 50% in N.A. and is not variable and does not allow re-charging. This hack is not sanctioned by BMW and may void the warranty. In today's nanny culture, no one will take this risk. Besides a 'hold mode' is the wrong idea to begin with. If you go in hold mode at 30%, you are stuck at 30%.
No, it can be driven for about an hour (maybe 1.5 hours in the current model), and then you have to stop and fill up.
Nope, a Rex driver will stop at the next gas station and fill up, rather than look for a charger, drive out of way, and wait for 1 to 4 hours for the i3 to charge up, everytime they drive 100 miles.
If BMW's intent was to discourage BEV adoption, I'd say they've failed. As to a REx, I personally have always thought that a straight PHEV was more generally salable and so it's proved, but the REx probably drives more miles (and a higher %) electrically, which was CARB's intent. That you attribute this to politics/ideology of someone at CARB is your opinion - the record of who did what and why is pretty clear, and available to the public.
Sorry, this makes no sense. First off, it is well known that BMW (and others) wishes not to cannibalize its existing line of luxury ICE, so they have little incentive to push EVs. A straight PHEV will cost 50% more than a MSEV (minimal genset serial EV) and offer nothing more, and be a lot more costly to maintain and fuel, and produce a lot more pollution. The MSEV concept has not even been tested yet, but you claim that a PHEV is superior to an MSEV? The i3 Rex is not an MSEV. Someone at CARB decided ideologically that the MSEV concept will generate too much pollution, due to their bigotry against range extenders which they had cut the clean air credit for. And due to their incompetence, they never attempted to investigate the MSEV concept, and when BMW offered them a 6.5% hold mode with a huge 35 HP genset, they grabbed it, knowing that it will discourage Rex purchase (and MSEVs in general).
CARB in their attempt to steer people away from ICE to EVs, decided unreasonably to kill the MSEV concept, and as a result killed the EV market. Why do you think EV adoption has been so anemic?
(I am happy to move this discussion to another thread - please advise.)
