RE: The i3 and BMW 360-degrees Electric

[matsoc]

I think the i3 is aa interesting EV offering, but I think I am still very fond to conventional cars...the thing I would like most in these packages is the conventional BMW they would gave me for long trips, when I realized this I think it would be fairly better buying a conventional car in the first place...

[TomG75]

loveice said:

I'm a bit confused about the 'range extender' model. I understand the 660cc bike engine acts like a petrol generator. So, does this mean an i3 with 'range extender' works like a locomotive? As long as you can top up the petrol tank, it will go on 'forever'... Or 185 mile is the max distance it will go even if there is still petrol left in the tank?

I guess BMW wants to play down the range extender model. Coz, there's nothing new here. The concept has been used for 100 years in different form of transportation. But clearly the range extender model makes more sense to most buyers if it does work like a normal locomotive engine.

I wondered the same and pieced bits together from the original review:
1) The generator automatically starts at 18% battery but can be manually started from 80%
2) It can maintain charge at motorway speeds

So I come to the conclusion that the 185 mile range is calculated on the assumption that you are not filling up. It would be good to get an official answer as so many seem to be bothered by it. Personally I am also interested to know why the tank size is so small? (Is it technical or purely by design?)

As I have the older V10 M5 I don't really understand all this fuss about range

[matsoc]

TomG75 said:

So I come to the conclusion that the 185 mile range is calculated on the assumption that you are not filling up.

Yes, It should be exactly like this. In other terms running on petrol the i3 makes 58mpg, not that bad

[rovermorris999]

That is one ugly car. It looks like it's made from three different Lego kits.

[will261058]

rovermorris999 said:

That is one ugly car. It looks like it's made from three different Lego kits.

Agreed. If they want to sell lots why not make it look better?

[F-Stop Junkie]

binnerboy said:

Unfortunately I have a family which means I need a larger car as occasionally we like to go camping/visiting family so need boot space and range.

How occasionally? Would the savings in fuel and other costs outweigh the occasional hire of a larger ICE car for those occasions?

Even if you do it outside the BMW 360 option, you could get a medium sized car for family visits, larger estate for camping holidays, and even a 4x4 if the mood/terrain suits!

[TomG75]

matsoc said:

Yes, It should be exactly like this. In other terms running on petrol the i3 makes 58mpg, not that bad

Aha! The official numbers from the BMW pricelist is 470.8 mpg and 13g/km CO2; I don't have any idea how they calculated that but I am guessing it explains why the tank is so small?

[matsoc]

TomG75 said:

matsoc said:

Yes, It should be exactly like this. In other terms running on petrol the i3 makes 58mpg, not that bad

Aha! The official numbers from the BMW pricelist is 470.8 mpg and 13g/km CO2; I don't have any idea how they calculated that but I am guessing it explains why the tank is so small?

Sorry, my mistake! I considered the extended range being 185km while it is 185miles...so the 9 litres tank equates to 93mpg, way better but still far to 470mpg!

[mrmr96]

matsoc said:

TomG75 said:

matsoc said:

Yes, It should be exactly like this. In other terms running on petrol the i3 makes 58mpg, not that bad

Aha! The official numbers from the BMW pricelist is 470.8 mpg and 13g/km CO2; I don't have any idea how they calculated that but I am guessing it explains why the tank is so small?

Sorry, my mistake! I considered the extended range being 185km while it is 185miles...so the 9 litres tank equates to 93mpg, way better but still far to 470mpg!

The official MPG is presumably calculated using that standard EU test, which is far from 185 miles long. As such most of the test will be conducted without the ICE turned on. Hence high MPG figures on that test of a journey sub 185 miles.

(Think about it, even if you have the REX, if you only do short trips and charge in between you'll never use any fuel. So it depends whether you measure MPG over a set distance or over the tank capacity. The current test is over a set distance.)

[matsoc]

mrmr96 said:

matsoc said:

TomG75 said:

matsoc said:

Yes, It should be exactly like this. In other terms running on petrol the i3 makes 58mpg, not that bad

Aha! The official numbers from the BMW pricelist is 470.8 mpg and 13g/km CO2; I don't have any idea how they calculated that but I am guessing it explains why the tank is so small?

Sorry, my mistake! I considered the extended range being 185km while it is 185miles...so the 9 litres tank equates to 93mpg, way better but still far to 470mpg!

The official MPG is presumably calculated using that standard EU test, which is far from 185 miles long. As such most of the test will be conducted without the ICE turned on. Hence high MPG figures on that test of a journey sub 185 miles.

(Think about it, even if you have the REX, if you only do short trips and charge in between you'll never use any fuel. So it depends whether you measure MPG over a set distance or over the tank capacity. The current test is over a set distance.)

Very True, actually I believe that a 90mpg value isn't bad at all if you consider that it is a kind of very unusual situation. I mean, if you are going to use often the car for a non stop (except for fueling) trip from UK to Italy you are not probably going to buy an EV. But if you WANT to do such a trip in REX i3 you can do it with (probably) better than diesel economy.

[silv]

Does anyone know how the tax issues if given an i3 as a company car ?

[I WISH]

I look forward to the courts dealing with the first cases of personal injury caused by tripping over i3 charging cables on the streets of Notting Hill.

[DaveCWK]

Why can't you run the range extender with the vehicle stationary in order to charge the batteries? According to that article it outputs the same amount of power as the fast 30min charge option.

This would mean you can drive on electric everywhere, and if you do happen to run out of juice you can park up, run the range extender for 30mins, and drive off with an 80% charge.

Won't this answer the efficiency criticisms from those in the other thread saying that "driving everywhere using the range extender would negate the point"?

[DonkeyApple]

DaveCWK said:

Why can't you run the range extender with the vehicle stationary in order to charge the batteries? According to that article it outputs the same amount of power as the fast 30min charge option.

This would mean you can drive on electric everywhere, and if you do happen to run out of juice you can park up, run the range extender for 30mins, and drive off with an 80% charge.

Won;t this answer the efficiency criticisms from those in the other thread saying that "driving everywhere using the range extender would negate the point"?

My guess, at this stage, is that if they start to talk about concepts such as sitting static while running a petrol engine the eco bandits will have a fit. Similar to why they aren't talking about manually overiding the RE and just repeatedly filling up the small tank, the emissions police would freak.

Likewise, I wonder if RE MPG is calculated based on the contents of the tank and if a larger tank is fitted the figure would be lower? Someone also mentioned that there is a Californian law that requires the RE to deliver a lower range than the batteries in order to obtain a tax grant or similar.

[matsoc]

DaveCWK said:

Why can't you run the range extender with the vehicle stationary in order to charge the batteries? According to that article it outputs the same amount of power as the fast 30min charge option.

This would mean you can drive on electric everywhere, and if you do happen to run out of juice you can park up, run the range extender for 30mins, and drive off with an 80% charge.

Won't this answer the efficiency criticisms from those in the other thread saying that "driving everywhere using the range extender would negate the point"?

Eh eh, seeing a super-green EV stopped in big city centre with ice engine running wouldn't be exactly a green view!
We can't forget that one of the point of EVs is offsetting the generation of air pollution. Why CO2 is a global emission, air problems in crowded cities are more realated to local emissions like CO, NOX and PM10. If an EV fails to make the air of a big city more breathable makes no sense at all...

[matsoc]

The production of energy by a ice range extender can't be very efficient, so it is wise to size the range extender small in terms of fuel tank capacity. The range extender is an answer to range anxiety, it is not the optimal way the charge the car

[PotHoleDodger]

No WP8 App

That's a total deal breaker .
How short sighted .

Ah it an i that's Y.

[PotHoleDodger]

Craiglamuffin said:

Is the charging cable secured to the vehicle in a way that stops someone walking past and unplugging it for a laugh?

Was that a serious question?
Maybe it's designed so anyone can just unplug it and plug in their ghetto blaster phone charger etc ...

What do you think.

[buggalugs]

silv said:

Does anyone know how the tax issues if given an i3 as a company car ?

Yes, you don't pay any

[McWigglebum4th]

DaveCWK said:

Why can't you run the range extender with the vehicle stationary in order to charge the batteries? According to that article it outputs the same amount of power as the fast 30min charge option.

Why would you want to even contemplate doing that?

Or is using petrol better then using electrons?