Official BMW i3 thread

[Dapipes2]

As you might conclude, based on the number of my posts to this forum, I don't know sh*t about EV's!

But I do know this:
I've driven a Leaf, Volt, Spark, Fiat....then I made the mistake of driving an i3 at the LA Auto Show's test drive event. I certainly can't say if the car is worth the $10-$15k premium, but believe me, the specs on paper doesn't do this car justice. This car is a fantastic driver. Unbelievably quick off the line. It just felt great!

If a prospective buyer can grow to love the look, I think this car deserves serious consideration. As to whether the range (non-Rex) is the same as the Leaf, I think that remains to be seen. The car's extremely light weight has to have a major impact on range. Only real-world driving will tell in the end.

Just my 2 cents!

 

[TonyWilliams]

As to whether the range (non-Rex) is the same as the Leaf, I think that remains to be seen. The car's extremely light weight has to have a major impact on range. Only real-world driving will tell in the end.

Weight is a marginal player in range when considering steady speed on level ground. Stop and go and hills change the dynamic.

 

[surfingslovak]

New video review by CarBuyer in the UK:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DuE2eZSDBIY[/youtube]

 

[adric22]

New video review by CarBuyer in the UK:

Nice.. I finally get to see where the gas is put into the car. I've been wondering about this.

 

[TonyWilliams]

New video review by CarBuyer in the UK:

Nice.. I finally get to see where the gas is put into the car. I've been wondering about this.

I posted pics of it in this very thread.

 

[edatoakrun]

Dan Neil (see the video at link below) seems to be impressed.

...The i3 is to driving cars what the first iPhone was to yakking with mom. A perfectly reasonable, perfectly visionary way to deliver function...

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304367204579266414135303066" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[surfingslovak]

Dan Neil (see the video at link below) seems to be impressed.

Here is a direct link to the HD version of the video:

http://m.wsj.net/video/20131220/122013bmw/122013bmw_1500k.mp4" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4d7R7vEDos[/youtube]

 

[LeftieBiker]

Weight is a marginal player in range when considering steady speed on level ground. Stop and go and hills change the dynamic.

That might matter a lot in the Midwest and West, but most driving in the world involves a lot of stopping, starting and hills. That's why the ICE champs at highway fuel economy have, before the Prius, been light. Our 1995 Camry could get a rather amazing (considering its size and weight) 35-40MPG, but throw in some city type driving and it dropped like a stone to 25-27.

 

[TomT]

Except that the first iPhone was actually abysmal at making and keeping calls!

...The i3 is to driving cars what the first iPhone was to yakking with mom.

 

[surfingslovak]

Except that the first iPhone was actually abysmal at making and keeping calls!

Haha, yes, I remember. That being said, the shortcomings of the first iPhone did not keep people from getting one. Nothing is perfect, obviously. I think Dan's point was that he was OK with the way the i3 looked and performed.

 

[GRA]

Except that the first iPhone was actually abysmal at making and keeping calls!

Haha, yes, I remember. That being said, the shortcomings of the first iPhone did not keep people from getting one. Nothing is perfect, obviously. I think Dan's point was that he was OK with the way the i3 looked and performed.

As usual, Dan came up with a couple of great descriptions, describing Eco Pro+ as the 'Apollo 13 option', and "BMW is surprisingly serious about making the i3 a sporty car, considering it looks like it should dispense hand towels." It hadn't occurred to me, but he's right, especially of you imagine the i3 stood on end and fastened to the wall of a bathroom! :lol:

There were a couple of questionable statements in the article, though. First, Dan wrote "The assembled car weighs about 2,700 pounds, which I estimate to be 1,000 pounds or so lighter than a comparable conventional vehicle." Considering that the larger LEAF with a 2kWh larger battery weighs something like 3,361 lb., and the somewhat smaller Spark EV comes in around 2,990, he's way off here.

Second, Dan writes ". . . with the [22kWh] liquid-cooled battery assembly (450 pounds) inside the deck, between the wheels." Chevy said the weight of the original liquid-cooled and heated 16kWh Volt pack (before strengthening) weighed 435 lb., and Nissan said the original uncooled LEAF pack weighed 680 lb. So, if the weight Dan gives is correct, either BMW is using batteries with a much higher specific energy (Wh/kg) than the Volt (22kWh/16kWh * 435 lb. would weigh 598 lb.), LEAF (22kWh/24kWh * 680 lb. would weigh 623 lb.), or any EV other than one with a Tesla powertrain. Alternatively, much of the weight that would normally be allocated to the pack structure is instead included in the weight of the skateboard, whether this saves actual weight or is just an accounting gimmick.

Does anyone (maybe Tom M.) know?

 

[TomMoloughney]

Except that the first iPhone was actually abysmal at making and keeping calls!

Haha, yes, I remember. That being said, the shortcomings of the first iPhone did not keep people from getting one. Nothing is perfect, obviously. I think Dan's point was that he was OK with the way the i3 looked and performed.

As usual, Dan came up with a couple of great descriptions, describing Eco Pro+ as the 'Apollo 13 option', and "BMW is surprisingly serious about making the i3 a sporty car, considering it looks like it should dispense hand towels." It hadn't occurred to me, but he's right, especially of you imagine the i3 stood on end and fastened to the wall of a bathroom! :lol:

There were a couple of questionable statements in the article, though. First, Dan wrote "The assembled car weighs about 2,700 pounds, which I estimate to be 1,000 pounds or so lighter than a comparable conventional vehicle." Considering that the larger LEAF with a 2kWh larger battery weighs something like 3,361 lb., and the somewhat smaller Spark EV comes in around 2,990, he's way off here.

Second, Dan writes ". . . with the [22kWh] liquid-cooled battery assembly (450 pounds) inside the deck, between the wheels." Chevy said the weight of the original liquid-cooled and heated 16kWh Volt pack (before strengthening) weighed 435 lb., and Nissan said the original uncooled LEAF pack weighed 680 lb. So, if the weight Dan gives is correct, either BMW is using batteries with a much higher specific energy (Wh/kg) than the Volt (22kWh/16kWh * 435 lb. would weigh 598 lb.), LEAF (22kWh/24kWh * 680 lb. would weigh 623 lb.), or any EV other than one with a Tesla powertrain. Alternatively, much of the weight that would normally be allocated to the pack structure is instead included in the weight of the skateboard, whether this saves actual weight or is just an accounting gimmick.

Does anyone (maybe Tom M.) know?

I agree about the weight, Dan clearly exaggerated it a bit. BMW has maintained that they saved 600lbs compared if they made the exact same car with conventional materials and I believe that probably sounds about right.

I don't have the specifics on the battery and battery structure weight. Good luck getting any manufacturer to break that out for us either. I don't think it's really possible to compare the given battery weight from car to car because as you said we don't know who is counting what as battery weight.

I can tell you this though, weight was everything to the engineers designing the i3. I heard stories of the engineers fighting with the design team over a half a pound - and I'm not kidding. That's why things like power seats were cut. People have speculated that they aren't available to save energy but think about it, how often do you use the power seats? The energy loss would be negligible. It was all about cutting weight.

 

[GRA]

Second, Dan writes ". . . with the [22kWh] liquid-cooled battery assembly (450 pounds) inside the deck, between the wheels." Chevy said the weight of the original liquid-cooled and heated 16kWh Volt pack (before strengthening) weighed 435 lb., and Nissan said the original uncooled LEAF pack weighed 680 lb. So, if the weight Dan gives is correct, either BMW is using batteries with a much higher specific energy (Wh/kg) than the Volt (22kWh/16kWh * 435 lb. would weigh 598 lb.), LEAF (22kWh/24kWh * 680 lb. would weigh 623 lb.), or any EV other than one with a Tesla powertrain. Alternatively, much of the weight that would normally be allocated to the pack structure is instead included in the weight of the skateboard, whether this saves actual weight or is just an accounting gimmick.

Does anyone (maybe Tom M.) know?

I don't have the specifics on the battery and battery structure weight. Good luck getting any manufacturer to break that out for us either. I don't think it's really possible to compare the given battery weight from car to car because as you said we don't know who is counting what as battery weight.

Ah well, worth a shot. It would certainly be harder for BMW to break out the pack weight than it was for GM or Nissan, as those are discrete components.

I can tell you this though, weight was everything to the engineers designing the i3. I heard stories of the engineers fighting with the design teem over a half a pound - and I'm not kidding. That's why things like power seats were cut. people have speculated that they aren't available to save energy but think about it, how often do you use the power seats? The energy loss would be negligible. It was all about cutting weight.

Sounds like what Shnayerson wrote about in "The Car that Could", about the development of the EV1. I forget the exact figure, but GM's engineers calculated exactly how many lb. lost or gained them 1 mile of range. I think it was something like 23 lb., but could be off by ten pounds either way.

I've always figured the main reason BMW went for carbon fiber on the i3 was as a buy-in on the technology, which they would need to use to keep producing their high profit big cars as CAFE tightened (Daimler is going the fuel-cell route). The investment they made in the manufacturing can't possibly be profitable if amortized over just one niche product. I see someone commented on insideevs.com along the same lines:

"I think a large part, although I’m sure not all, of the reason BMW did CF for the i3 is, as a low volume niche vehicle, it was the PERFECT platform with which to learn and practice CF technology in automobile manufacturing. It would have been incredibly risky, and expensive, to try to start one of their mainstream lines with CF for a new model year. With the i3, it’s OK if they lose some money of the CF part, and it’s OK if they get a bunch of hiccups that delay the vehicle. And, by the time they get all the wrinkles ironed out, they’ll have a damn good idea of what components should and shouldn’t be made in CF, what the tradeoffs are, and how to manufacture them reliably in volume. Again, the i3 was the perfect test platform for them."

I expect we'll see CFRP start appearing on the 4 through 7 series in the next couple of years.

 

[surfingslovak]

Guy, good question. This was discussed at some length in the BMW i3 Facebook group a while ago. Here are my best guesses for cell energy density (all in Wh/kg) formulated during that discussion: 100 for SCiB (Honda), 107 for GS Yuasa (Mitsubishi), 140 for AESC (Nissan), 150 for LG Chem (GM), 160 for SB LiMotive (BMW), 240 for Panasonic (Tesla). This would warrant more research though. I didn't realize this before, but both Tesla and BMW likely benefit from using aluminum instead of steel for the battery enclosure. (Chevy Volt is reportedly going to 176 Wh/kg in 2014 MY.)

 

[GRA]

Guy, good question. This was discussed at some length in the BMW i3 Facebook group a while ago. Here are my best guesses for cell energy density (all in Wh/kg) formulated during that discussion: 100 for SCiB (Honda), 107 for GS Yuasa (Mitsubishi), 140 for AESC (Nissan), 150 for LG Chem (GM), 160 for SB LiMotive (BMW), 240 for Panasonic (Tesla). This would warrant more research though. I didn't realize this before, but both Tesla and BMW likely benefit from using aluminum instead of steel for the battery enclosure. (Chevy Volt is reportedly going to 176 Wh/kg in 2014 MY.)

Thanks for the info, and I hope all here enjoyed XMAS.

 

[Boomer23]

Option pricing was released yesterday for the i3 in the US.

Tom wrote a very useful blog post on the topic, with a link to a pricing sheet.

http://bmwi3.blogspot.com/2013/12/bmw-i3-us-option-pricing-released.html?m=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Range of pricing: $42K before TTL and incentives for a base BEV-only Mega version with a pretty good list of standard features, and $56K for a full boat, leather Tera version with the range extender (REx), high end sound system, parking assistant, big screen NAV, etc, etc and 20 inch sport wheels.

Not sure which options I'd choose yet, or even whether I'd get an i3 at all. Glad I've got 18 months before my lease expires on my 2013 LEAF to learn from the early i3 adopters' experiences.

 

[TomT]

Kind of pricey in some respects, particularly if you start adding options... For example, $2,500 if you want Nav (which apparently only comes as part of a package)... But then, this has always been the BMW way of doing things...

Also interesting that you do not get the heat pump with the Rex... That's going to play hell with peoples electric-only range in cold climates...

Option pricing was released yesterday for the i3 in the US.

 

[Boomer23]

Kind of pricey in some respects... $2,500 if you want nav (which apparently only comes as part of a package)...
Also interesting that you do not get the heat pump with the Rex... That's going to play hell with peoples electric-only range in cold climates...

Option pricing was released yesterday for the i3 in the US.

If you read the standard equipment listing, "business NAV" is included as standard. The NAV that's part of the the package you mentioned is the bigger screen NAV, as far as I know.

I agree on the heat pump issue with REx. I guess there was a space issue in packaging the heat pump with the REx engine installed, and BMW feels that the range sapping is compensated by the petrol engine's additional range. Not ideal at all IMO.

 

[TomT]

I've driven BMWs with the business nav and there are more differences than just size... I don't believe that many would be happy with it. It's kind of like the display system on the Leaf S model...

If you read the standard equipment listing, "business NAV" is included as standard. The NAV that's part of the the package you mentioned is the bigger screen NAV, as far as I know.

 

[TomT]

Yeah, this one may come back and bite them in the butt I think!

I agree on the heat pump issue with REx. I guess there was a space issue in packaging the heat pump with the REx engine installed, and BMW feels that the range sapping is compensated by the petrol engine's additional range. Not ideal at all IMO.