RE: The i3 and BMW 360-degrees Electric
Discussion
McWigglebum4th said:
Why would you want to even contemplate doing that?
Or is using petrol better then using electrons?
Because you would be able to charge it back up without having to be near a charge point? It would be like carrying around a 'one use' (read: one fuel tank) fast charge station with you. I'm not saying charge it 100% of the time with the above method Or is using petrol better then using electrons?
DaveCWK said:
McWigglebum4th said:
Why would you want to even contemplate doing that?
Or is using petrol better then using electrons?
Because you would be able to charge it back up without having to be near a charge point? It would be like carrying around a 'one use' (read: one fuel tank) fast charge station with you. I'm not saying charge it 100% of the time with the above method Or is using petrol better then using electrons?
As someone mentioned earlier there is apparently a button to bring the RE on as soon as you are at 80% which means the battery stays at a pretty high level of charge. You could even just stop every 100 miles to fill up if you wanted to travel a long distance (or take a jerry can or 2).
By the time that you have bought all the gubbins to make it work properly, and taking depreciation into account, I would wager these would be loads more expensive than a sinilar performing ICE.
What will this be worth in 5-10 years when electric technology has progressed?
(To me of course it will be worth the same as it is now- nitto)
What will this be worth in 5-10 years when electric technology has progressed?
(To me of course it will be worth the same as it is now- nitto)
disco666 said:
By the time that you have bought all the gubbins to make it work properly, and taking depreciation into account, I would wager these would be loads more expensive than a sinilar performing ICE.
What will this be worth in 5-10 years when electric technology has progressed?
(To me of course it will be worth the same as it is now- nitto)
I think if you took a 120D and specced it up the same the number would be horrific when you looked away from the desk to look at what you were actually buying. What will this be worth in 5-10 years when electric technology has progressed?
(To me of course it will be worth the same as it is now- nitto)
Concerns over depreciation I think are the most valid issue with EVs. They are too new for there to be credible data.
I think this would be one car I would lease so as to lock in costs at the outset and hedge out that risk.
PotHoleDodger said:
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.
Yes it was a genuine question. I just can't get over how tempting it will be for some oik to see the cable plugged into a shiny new BMW and start yanking it. Maybe it's designed so anyone can just unplug it and plug in their ghetto blaster phone charger etc ...
What do you think.
I see from the article BMW are saying 8 out of 10 people are interested in the Range Extender. Once again, the pure EV is not really engaging with the public and destined for a naff future.
A Range Extender is only a Hybrid anyway. Only the terminology and definitions vary.
I wonder when BMW will lease a set of branded and type approved Jerry Cans for £40 a month to extend the range even further and delay that horrendous and demeaning experience of having to go to a petrol station
A Range Extender is only a Hybrid anyway. Only the terminology and definitions vary.
I wonder when BMW will lease a set of branded and type approved Jerry Cans for £40 a month to extend the range even further and delay that horrendous and demeaning experience of having to go to a petrol station
Craiglamuffin said:
Yes it was a genuine question. I just can't get over how tempting it will be for some oik to see the cable plugged into a shiny new BMW and start yanking it.
The charging connection is locked in place together with the car locking system.It's as open to abuse as wiper blades, grill, wing mirrors, wheel covers and badges
We already live with the risk those components could be removed by idiots.
Technomatt said:
I see from the article BMW are saying 8 out of 10 people are interested in the Range Extender. Once again, the pure EV is not really engaging with the public and destined for a naff future.
People are wary of something unknown. It's a big leap to go pure EV, and worry that you might get stranded somewhere, or forget to charge the car. A range extender is an insurance policy against that.Plus for resale you'll probably be selling to people buying their first EV, and they'll want the get out of jail free card of the range extender. I can imagine a few pure i3s getting stuck on dealer forecourts in a few years time.
Remember that these are transitional times. People buying i3s, Leafs, Amperas, iMevs and Teslas are early adopters, and they're starting to learn what it means to run an electric car. Some will find that range anxiety is actually a fear they don't have in practise and therefore they'd look at a pure EV next time.
Some commenters here (and elsewhere) demand a 300+ mile range from an EV before they'd consider one, but I suspect most do less than 100 miles a day (or between possible charging points). No one is saying that EVs should replace all cars, but how many people here own a Transit because of the need to occasionally move a bulky piece of furniture? The i range is, currently, a halo EV. It's not hard to imagine an i4, i5, i6 and i7 that seat more people and have bigger boots, but I doubt they'd work for the 30k-40k miles a year sales rep for the foreseeable future, so they'll pay more and more for ICE cars (and fuel!) but that will be a cost of the tool needed to do a job.
What is a minimum acceptable daily range before people would actively consider an EV version of their current car? 100 miles? 150 miles?
Fair enough, not a bad reply!F-Stop Junkie said:
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!
It would only work financially as a company car as I would only have to pay leccy to charge it, and with the 360 plan might actually work.
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?That's like taking an ICE car and calculating it after the car has free wheeled down a mountain pass. If you did that you would have trading standards all over you.
For EV's and Hybrids there should be a calculation of kWh/mile wile on battery, and an equivalence to mpg.
Is the range extender similar to AC propulsions backtracking genset trailer? IIRC they did the electric stuff in the mini e so it wouldn't surprise me:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genset_trailer
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genset_trailer
Silent1 said:
Is the range extender similar to AC propulsions backtracking genset trailer? IIRC they did the electric stuff in the mini e so it wouldn't surprise me:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genset_trailer
What a sinner.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genset_trailer
Being seen in a petrol station and actually using the evil concoction.
Has anyone ever thought of putting the trailer ICE in the car, letting it drive the road wheels, dumping the batteries and getting rid of the trailer?
Technomatt said:
Silent1 said:
Is the range extender similar to AC propulsions backtracking genset trailer? IIRC they did the electric stuff in the mini e so it wouldn't surprise me:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genset_trailer
What a sinner.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genset_trailer
Being seen in a petrol station and actually using the evil concoction.
Has anyone ever thought of putting the trailer ICE in the car, letting it drive the road wheels, dumping the batteries and getting rid of the trailer?
As we are on a heavy 'cut and paste' run:
The Many Costs of Obama’s Electric Car Folly
![](http://thumbsnap.com/sc/jQPPuFz3.jpg[/img]</a> <a href="http://thumbsnap.com/jQPPuFz3" Target="_blank">[img]http://thumbsnap.com/sc/jQPPuFz3.jpg)
It appears that there is no end in sight to the Obama Administration's costly quest to electrify America's auto fleet, despite the recent flurry of reports that continue to confirm that the benefits of electric vehicles (EVs) are practically nonexistent in comparison to the costs. One of these reports even came from Obama's own NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) panel which downplayed the importance of EVs and claimed that electric cars will only need to account for between one and three percent of car manufacturer's product portfolios by 2025 for lofty government EPA requirements to be met.
The Autoguide.com article on the NHTSA panel findings states, "Despite those findings, the government has willingly shoveled millions of dollars at manufacturers and consumers in a ploy to popularize electric cars." I would whole-heartedly agree with that, except it has been "billions" of dollars shoveled, not "millions." And money is not all that has been shoveled as the hype for plug-in EVs like the Chevy Volt misrepresented the potential for the current technology claiming huge demand for a vehicle that was to be a game-changer. The demand has still not materialized, but the costs to taxpayers and consumers continue to climb.
The costs to both taxpayers and consumers are accumulating in many areas, some more obvious than others. President Obama initially dumped $2.4 billion into the EV market in the form of grants (primarily to develop the much-hyped Chevy Volt) back in 2009. Federal tax credits for EVs cost taxpayers $7,500 per vehicle sold. State tax credits add an average of close to $2,000 each. Less obvious is the fact that drivers of EVs are not paying their fair share of gasoline taxes to maintain the nation's highways.
Consumers of all new vehicles will have to pay the price as well. Automakers are currently absorbing huge losses for EVs, which are still not economically viable. These costs will have to be passed along to buyers as more commercially logical gas-powered cars will have to see price increases to make up for the losses. As reported by Businessweek.com and Bloomberg, if automakers do not offer steep discounts on EVs they will not be able to meet increasingly strict state and federal requirements.
The Many Costs of Obama’s Electric Car Folly
It appears that there is no end in sight to the Obama Administration's costly quest to electrify America's auto fleet, despite the recent flurry of reports that continue to confirm that the benefits of electric vehicles (EVs) are practically nonexistent in comparison to the costs. One of these reports even came from Obama's own NHTSA (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) panel which downplayed the importance of EVs and claimed that electric cars will only need to account for between one and three percent of car manufacturer's product portfolios by 2025 for lofty government EPA requirements to be met.
The Autoguide.com article on the NHTSA panel findings states, "Despite those findings, the government has willingly shoveled millions of dollars at manufacturers and consumers in a ploy to popularize electric cars." I would whole-heartedly agree with that, except it has been "billions" of dollars shoveled, not "millions." And money is not all that has been shoveled as the hype for plug-in EVs like the Chevy Volt misrepresented the potential for the current technology claiming huge demand for a vehicle that was to be a game-changer. The demand has still not materialized, but the costs to taxpayers and consumers continue to climb.
The costs to both taxpayers and consumers are accumulating in many areas, some more obvious than others. President Obama initially dumped $2.4 billion into the EV market in the form of grants (primarily to develop the much-hyped Chevy Volt) back in 2009. Federal tax credits for EVs cost taxpayers $7,500 per vehicle sold. State tax credits add an average of close to $2,000 each. Less obvious is the fact that drivers of EVs are not paying their fair share of gasoline taxes to maintain the nation's highways.
Consumers of all new vehicles will have to pay the price as well. Automakers are currently absorbing huge losses for EVs, which are still not economically viable. These costs will have to be passed along to buyers as more commercially logical gas-powered cars will have to see price increases to make up for the losses. As reported by Businessweek.com and Bloomberg, if automakers do not offer steep discounts on EVs they will not be able to meet increasingly strict state and federal requirements.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff