BMW i3 / New 94ah Battery / SAME size & weight as old 60ah
 

Elon Musk says battery density is improving 5-7% compounded annually.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6O1w_NEurg

ICE cars will soon become as undesirable as CRT TV screens. And, like HDTV flat panel technology, EV tech will continuously improve; becoming cheaper and going further per single charge.

What I can't figure out is how DraigFlag/Paul needs 2 cars to get around a 4,000 population town when a bicycle will likely do the job.

I watched the fully charged video last night. Not a fan of the i3, my bosses brother has one, but it drives better than it looks. I was surprised some people are getting 150-200 miles from the ioniq too, didn't realise it was that capable.

I only have 1 car doug ;)

When asked for his thoughts about the i3, it was reported Elon Musk chuckled. So, I was surprised at how much Robert Llewellyn gushed about it.

In another Fuelly post, someone commented on the i3's looks. It's bad, but forgivable when put next to the Nissan Leaf.

Keep in mind that the BMW i3 is labeled as as "pure EV", but mind the small print. The standard i3 gets a North American reported range of 80 to 100 miles. That's unforgivable by most people's standards. The "Range Extended" version ("REx" option) gets you up to around 150 miles total; still dismal by most accounts. These numbers are based on the original capacity batteries.

The Range Extended version includes a 647cc gasoline (petrol) engine that acts as a generator to recharge the batteries. BMW had to deliberately cripple the vehicle by allowing only a tiny fuel tank so that it can qualify as an EV. Otherwise, with a bigger tank, it would have been categorized as a Plug-in Hybrid, and perceived as an even worse offering. A US$48,445 Plug-in Hybrid with an extended range of only 150 miles, and a gasoline-only range of about 50 miles? Embarrassing.

Factor in the price tag starting at US$43,395 and you're left wondering what BMW offers beside the badge that justifies that number.

If Tesla makes good on the promise to deliver Model 3s for $35,000 with a range of "at least 215 miles", that's double the range of the base i3 with a pricetag that's $8,395 (19%) smaller. It also still handily beats the more expensive Range Extended i3's range by 43% for a lot less moolah.

The i3 just doesn't make sense on so many levels... unless you're a big-time BMW fan, or you love the look or something. On range and cost, there are much better options.

And, THAT is why Musk chuckled when asked for his opinion about the i3.

I think some part of the i3's high price is due to the carbon fiber body that sits on an aluminum frame. It will never rust, it's light and very strong. The i3 is the cheapest car on sale that has a carbon fiber tub. Having said that, $45,000 is still a lot of money for a car.

Hmmm. Most interesting. In light of that info, I'm gonna wait 'til a used i3 depreciates to US$3,000. By THAT time, battery tech will be so advanced that I can replace the original i3 battery pack with a "D"-size, flashlight battery.

Second hand ones selling here for about £15,000 ($18500 roughly) already with just over 10,000 miles. Always best to wait, as I said in my other thread, current EV's loose almost 90% in the first few years due to the ever developing battery tech.

$2.50 a mile depreciation. Heck, I'll chauffeur you around for that money, LOL!

100 miles a day = $250. My out of pocket cost=$6.60

Govt allows $.50

Income $250
Deduction $50
Fuel cost $3.35
Net $241.65 PER DAY driving 100 miles.

Still saves you taxes, insurance, fuel and any maintenance, license, city tag, etc.

A casual check of used i3 prices in the San Francisco area show 2014 models selling for US$19,000 with 20,000 miles and US$19,300 with 18,000 miles.

Recently saw an AutoLine Daily show with industry experts saying 2nd tier of buyers for used EVs are NOT there, which is the reason for used EV depreciating so deeply.

Yes the limited range on the current phase of EV's means they are bought and then sold on mostly in cities a big towns etc, so only appeal to a local market.

BMW has been working on getting carbon fiber down in cost, and the i3 is a showcase for how far they've gotten. Toyota partnered with them on fuel cell technology in order to have access to their carbon fiber expertise.

I find the strategic business alliances between car companies most interesting. Benz financially rescued Tesla. You can bet a lot of Tesla DNA will end up in Benz EVs.

Panasonic is also a partner in the Tesla Gigafactory.

Isn't Ford associated with Mazda?

What other bed partners are there?

The rather dull B200 EV does indeed have a Tesla drivetrain, and Tesla use Mercedes switchgear, such as the indicator stalks etc. But the B200 has a low spec battery that has a poor range and NO rapid charge capability. Big mistake there.

https://pictures.topspeed.com/IMG/cro...as_1600x0w.jpg

Gee. From the looks of it that Benz has no Benz DNA.

If you're interested in non-fawning perspective on Mercedes, give this guy a listen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAgY6A3RPcU

I don't walk away from it thinking "Mercedes is horrible," but I it supports my view that Mercedes in reality, does not measure up to Mercedes in perception. Still, I like some MB vehicles, knowing they're expensive to own and Status is their biggest selling point.

FWIW, I drive an Audi Q5... not far from that mark either, though more affordable to purchase and own than a Mercedes.

Enjoyed that, Steve!

Here's a couple for ya. Scotty Kilmer, a Texas auto mechanic, offers his take on Benzs:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XV9rJwEOCus

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPJ64sTa7KI

Here are the prices of the carbon tub cars that are currently on sale, so all things considered the i3 is not that bad:

$45,000 BMW i3
$61,000 Alfa Romeo 4C
$78,000 KTM X-Bow (not really a car)
$295,575 McLaren 650S Spider
$379,575 Lexus LFA
$847,975 Porsche 918 Spyder

BMW recently built the BMW S1000RR sportbike that comes in a carbon version. The frame, swingarm, body panels and wheels are all made of carbon fiber and these parts were possible to make due to the factory where the i3 and i8 is assembled.

luv2spd: If someone is hung up on "needing" a carbon fiber tub, your comparison is intriguing. For the other >99% of drivers who don't care about that, the i3 is a much less compelling offer, carbon fiber hot-tub notwithstanding.

The CF structure is important in an EV to save weight, as the batteries are extremely heavy. It's why Tesla make 97% of thier cars from aluminium, they have to save as much weight to make the car light and the range better.

I believe most car buyers don’t care how a manufacturer does what they need to do. They look at what they get for the dollar. BMW elected to use expensive carbon fiber (carbon fiber forms are all hand-built) to reduce weight. It’s one of the things that makes a car cost US$42,400 while offering a range of only about 100 miles (EPA).

No doubt carbon fiber delivers huge bang (light-weight, yet stronger than steel and dent-resistant), but it does this at a huge bucks price.

Meanwhile, other manufacturers are electing to employ less expensive production methods to deliver EVs with a lower price tag and a higher range. As long as carbon fiber is expensive, it's hard to make an argument for its use in consumer vehicles... except when it's a selling point for those who salivate at hearing "carbon fiber," and who are willing to shell out big bucks to get it.

Toyota also had a partnership with Tesla to make the Rav4 EV. It is how Tesla ended up with the NUMMI factory. Toyota sold their Tesla shares once the contracted Rav4 EVs were made. It was around the time they brought the Mirai to market.

Ford had controlling ownership of Mazda, but Mazda brought back most of it when Ford was in financial trouble. They are working with Toyota on some things now. The Yaris iA in the US is the SkyActiv Mazda2.

There was a Ford and Toyota partnership working on hybrid trucks, but it fell apart. I don't think a power split system lends itself to truck duties, and Toyota likely wants to stick to HSD. Sounds like the F150 hybrid will be a parallel one.

Carbon fiber is expensive, but not that long ago a car like the i3 would have cost twice as much to make. The cost reductions BMW has achieved allows for carbon fiber parts to be used in lower cost cars. The Prius Prime plug in has a carbon fiber hatch.

No offense intended to you, but that quote sounds "salesman-ish." We're talking about the i3's cost vs range, and that's "pricey" vs "embarrassingly short." Carbon fiber doesn't change that... unless you're enamored with carbon and are willing to pay the premium and sacrifice range to get the alleged benefits of carbon fiber in an i3.

The benefits are "I got a carbon fiber tub in my car." They are not "my car is less expensive than the competition due to carbon" or "I have noteworthy (in a good way) range because of carbon fiber."

Carbon fiber doesn't make much financial sense, but if you want to get that last bit of advantage and you have money, then it's the go to material for car manufacturers.

The way I look at it is this: if the '16 $65,000 Ford Mustang GT350R has carbon fiber wheels from factory; why don't sports cars that cost double that come with them? Replacement cost for one front and one rear wheel for the Mustang is $3,433 and $4,053. Now before you think that's ridiculous; some people are willing to pay the $15,000 option for carbon-ceramic brakes on their new car. So there is a lot of craziness going on. I have been looking at buying a set of carbon fiber wheels for my motorcycle for 7-10 years now; but they are still the same price that they were back then which is about $4,600 a set.

Here is a test result that Car And Driver did when they compared the same '16 GT350 Mustang with aluminum vs carbon fiber wheels:

Aluminum vs Carbon Fiber
Wheel and Tire Weight: F:61lb R: 61lb; F:46lb R:47lb
Acceleration 30-50mph: 10.8s vs 9.9s
Acceleration 50-70mph: 10.5s vs 9.7s
Acceleration 30-130mph: 17.7s vs 16.5s
Coast Down 60-1mph: 139s vs 134s
Coast Down 60-1mph: 4944ft vs 4785ft

In motorcycle racing carbon fiber wheels are banned because of their cost, so they use magnesium. A magazine once did a test using the same bike that they fitted with carbon fiber wheels vs the stock cast aluminum; the bike was 2s per lap quicker which is a huge gain per money spent. This is a South African made BST rear rim that costs about $2,500; it has a special clear coat that provides a UV protection that is guaranteed for 10 years.

https://www.fuelly.com/attachments/fo...ea78efe33d.jpg

WOW! Those are some impressive differences, but how do you not worry about parking the car in public with such expensive rims?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
What he said.

I totally agree with you, that's one of the few downsides with a rim that expensive. You can do things to avoid thiefs as much as possible, but there is only so much you can do. I have an underground parking with cameras, and my motorcycle is always under a black cover when not used; and it's not one of those covers that has "YAMAHA" written on it to advertise what's under it.

You cant worry about what "might" happen. A set of tyres on a Veyron Super Sport are $25,000. Most people fit locking wheel nuts, but I always take mine off, not a big fan and it only takes one over enthusiastic mechanic to screw them up, literally!

SO, how long have you had the Veyron, Paul?

Without the carbon fiber, the i3 would still be pricey, have an even shorter range, and also be slower. Until the Ioniq Electric, it was the most efficient BEV available in North America.

Cutting weight is going to be a big part of cars hitting fuel efficiency and carbon emission targets. Carbon fiber will be an option to do so, even in cheaper cars. The Prius Prime already uses a carbon fiber hatch, and it starts at $27.2k or so.

In every second of driving for 50 years now, situational awareness is essentially "worrying about what might happen". This additional level of attention paid to all factors of driving has saved my life on several occasions, with two examples following.

Sitting in a line of stopped traffic in my 1959 Corvette, I saw the driver behind me not slowing down. I pulled over into the median grass strip between the opposing lanes of the 4 lane highway allowing the following driver just enough distance to skid to a stop. I had enough distance between my car and the car in front of me to make this move for exactly this reason.

On the same road not even a mile further north, driving normally, the 1968 Pontiac GTO in front of me slammed on his brakes at a turning point on the road, one without an exit lane, leaving his rear end sticking out into the 55 mph oncoming traffic.

Because I KNEW the lane to my right was clear, I pulled over into that lane. The car behind me slammed into the GTO spinning it around two times, a terrific collision. I turned around and went into a tractor sales shop and told them to call an ambulance (no 911 at that time).

The woman driving the car that hit the GTO was badly injured and after about 15 minutes the police realized that her infant child was up under the dashboard of the car (no child safety seats required at that time). Both survived with significant injuries.

Enjoyed your stories, Gary.

Great stories about car thieves?.....