RE: BMW i4: 530hp, 372 miles of range confirmed

[RobDickinson]

lol at all the BMW butt hurt.

I'm sure the i4 will be a decent effort, but lets not get excited about the stats until its actually in testers hands, none of the German cars have yet measured up even close to what they crowed about before launch.

[big_rob_sydney]

To the people saying Tesla don't handle, stop, etc, have you seen the latest Ring times??

Frankly, I don't see THIS car matching Tesla., in ANY performance metric.

About the only issue I see is quality of manufacture. As some others have said, 2 years is a long time in the car game. In the meantime, Tesla are so far out in front, it's ... ludicrous?

[RobDickinson]

The 3 has blown away everyone who has tested it and won awards all over. It obviously can handle and is quick, and still has a relatively simple and comfortable suspension.

For a sporty version it really needs better seats and trick suspension though.


I think the i4 specs are pretty decent as stated but if its not out until end of 2021 its 4 years after the tesla - note the (2017) LR RWD model 3 with current efficiency and WLTP rating would do over 370 miles - charge at 250kw also and do it with a smaller battery.

[otolith]

RobDickinson said:

The 3 has blown away everyone who has tested it and won awards all over.

Yeah, but it’s not German, is it?

[jamoor]

ntiz said:

Greg the Fish said:

Trying too hard to disguise that hideous front end.

Who in their right mind would take one of these over a Tesla?

Anyone sane??

People who like cars that handle.
Stop properly
Built properly.
Don’t like systems crashing
Something approaching customer service

I could go for quite a while.

Before you call me a hater I’m a 2x Tesla Model S owner. Only reason you buy the Tesla is for the charging network.

Best part here is customer service. I liked the way that my interaction with a Tesla employee when buying my model 3 was literally 15 minutes or less. I purchased the car online in minutes, just try to order a bmw 3 series on their website and you will just walk away confused as you’ve no idea what’s going on.

For all the other points my M3 is ok apart from the panels alignment which I’m willing to forgive for a relatively stress free ownership experience.


Anyway I wait and see what BMW manages to produce and what kind of a product the M3 turns into in two years time as they’ve already introduced numerous features via software updates already. My car can now be driven around without pressing the brake pedal!

[RobDickinson]

otolith said:

RobDickinson said:

The 3 has blown away everyone who has tested it and won awards all over.

Yeah, but it’s not German, is it?

It won a German award and will be built in Germany soon.. (well the model Y will be, in 2021 too, in a factory not yet started..)

[Sten.]

Just checking in to make sure fishy Greg and A1VDY have made their valuable contributions. Glad to see it's business as usual.

[unsprung]

9k rpm said:

I really think cars like these will be the tipping point for the EV market...

Ares said:

Give it chance.... When current platforms were in design stage, EV was still not a mainstream short-term plan.

Court_S said:

My guess is that by making it look like a normal car then it’ll sell better.

+1

The next 36 months could be historic.

Legacy OEMs will unleash cars that are remarkable because, well, they're not remarkable -- if you see what I mean. They will be BEVs that require little compromise whilst looking normal or interesting in a mainstream way.

I'm not suggesting an immediate inversion of the percentage of BEV and ICE cars. The estimates are clear on that.

I reckon, however, that a significant percentage of PHers will have a "eureka moment" or -- don't laugh there in the back! -- even a life-changing experience during the next three years.

A good percentage of PHers will have purchased or leased a BEV. Many more will have been a passenger and/or driver in a friend's BEV.

Likely to occur at some point in the next 36 months... "Remember when...?"

[Jon_S_Rally]

Ares said:

Give it chance.... When current platforms were in design stage, EV was still not a mainstream short-term plan.

But even then, there are fundamental differences. EVs need their batteries under the floor for CoG. ICE don't.

EVs bring about huge different design potential, but you have to give it chance.

I think they have had plenty of chance to be honest. Model S has been on sale for 7 years, hybrids have been on sale for about 20 years. The push for EVs is far from a new one. With that in mind, I would have thought a few more cars would be capable of supporting all powertrain types by now. It shows that perhaps OEMs have been forward looking enough.

Court_S said:

My guess is that by making it look like a normal car then it’ll sell better. I love the i3 (the materials, design etc) but for many it just looks too odd. The first thing most people comment on about the i3 is how it looks.

For me, BMW’s i cars have been a wasted opportunity. They did something different and had the opportunity to get the jump on their competition but they haven’t really developed the concept much and now appear to be changing direction.

Agree 100%. I would never drive something like an i3. The styling is ridiculous to my eyes. I think this is part of why the Tesla Model 3 has been successful as, for the most part, it just looks like a car. People don't want something that looks like a spaceship.

big_rob_sydney said:

To the people saying Tesla don't handle, stop, etc, have you seen the latest Ring times??

Frankly, I don't see THIS car matching Tesla., in ANY performance metric.

About the only issue I see is quality of manufacture. As some others have said, 2 years is a long time in the car game. In the meantime, Tesla are so far out in front, it's ... ludicrous?

Tesla have come along way, but I'm not sure I'd put too much stock in those 'ring times. We have no idea what level of modification has been carried out to that Model S they've been using.

Also, a quick car is not necessarily an exciting one.

[LimaDelta]

Jon_S_Rally said:

Agree 100%. I would never drive something like an i3. The styling is ridiculous to my eyes. I think this is part of why the Tesla Model 3 has been successful as, for the most part, it just looks like a car. People don't want something that looks like a spaceship.

Whereas that's exactly why I did buy an i3. If I'm driving the 'car of the future' I want it to look like a spaceship!

Horses for courses I guess, but I don't see why designers need to be constrained by conventional thinking given there is no longer any need to house a lump of cast aluminum and a cooling system under the bonnet.

If BMW go back to conventional styling for their 'i' cars then my flirtation with the brand will be brief.

[Earthdweller]

I’d actually rather have an electric car that looks like a 3 series .. has a 500 mile range and about 200bhp

A 500bhp 0-60 4s electric car for 100k doesn’t interest me at all

[otolith]

Jon_S_Rally said:

The thing that irks me about cars like this is the use of a separate platform. Of course the architecture needs of an EV can be rather different to that of an ICE car, but making an EV platform and an ICE platform seems massively inefficient. Finding ways to fit EV powertrains/batteries into existing vehicles, or developing single platforms that can support both (or a combination) would seem much more sensible to me. It's clear that ICE and hybrid cars are going to play a role for some time yet, so why not just offer platforms that can do all three? Hyundai have done it with the IONIQ which, although a bit of a minger, seems a really sensible way forward.

The EV I and many others want is still very much a normal car, without the token space-age looks, but with normal styling, normal equipment, normal interior space, normal range and normal performance. It just seems to me that, sadly, many of the EVs coming out at the moment are as much a virtue-signalling marketing exercise as they are a serious transport proposition.

The problem with accommodating very different shaped hardware is that you can end up with a design that doesn't get the best packaging out of either.

People often are resistant to change - remember them calling Sierras "jelly moulds"? Manufacturers are still making quite conventional looking EVs (most of the i3's weirdness was just wilfully weird rather than particularly innovative) and even when there are more optimised designs about it will take a while before what you can do with an electric powertrain looks "normal" and what you have to do with an ICE one looks "old fashioned".

[Shaoxter]

LimaDelta said:

Jon_S_Rally said:

Agree 100%. I would never drive something like an i3. The styling is ridiculous to my eyes. I think this is part of why the Tesla Model 3 has been successful as, for the most part, it just looks like a car. People don't want something that looks like a spaceship.

Whereas that's exactly why I did buy an i3. If I'm driving the 'car of the future' I want it to look like a spaceship!

Horses for courses I guess, but I don't see why designers need to be constrained by conventional thinking given there is no longer any need to house a lump of cast aluminum and a cooling system under the bonnet.

If BMW go back to conventional styling for their 'i' cars then my flirtation with the brand will be brief.

Same here! Because it's a ground up design, the i3 has lots of interior space for its size. But because it's still very compact, it's light, easy to park and has the turning circle of a black cab making it the perfect city car. Sat in a Leaf which feels utterly drab and uninspiring in comparison.

And in any case, everyone who has seen the car or sat in it has commented on how great it is

[Leon R]

Earthdweller said:

I’d actually rather have an electric car that looks like a 3 series .. has a 500 mile range and about 200bhp

A 500bhp 0-60 4s electric car for 100k doesn’t interest me at all

^This.

I don't think an electric car is ever going to excite me enough to have it as a fun car so huge power does not matter to me at all, I would take range over power every time.

[wisbech]

otolith said:

Jon_S_Rally said:

The thing that irks me about cars like this is the use of a separate platform. Of course the architecture needs of an EV can be rather different to that of an ICE car, but making an EV platform and an ICE platform seems massively inefficient. Finding ways to fit EV powertrains/batteries into existing vehicles, or developing single platforms that can support both (or a combination) would seem much more sensible to me. It's clear that ICE and hybrid cars are going to play a role for some time yet, so why not just offer platforms that can do all three? Hyundai have done it with the IONIQ which, although a bit of a minger, seems a really sensible way forward.

The EV I and many others want is still very much a normal car, without the token space-age looks, but with normal styling, normal equipment, normal interior space, normal range and normal performance. It just seems to me that, sadly, many of the EVs coming out at the moment are as much a virtue-signalling marketing exercise as they are a serious transport proposition.

The problem with accommodating very different shaped hardware is that you can end up with a design that doesn't get the best packaging out of either.

People often are resistant to change - remember them calling Sierras "jelly moulds"? Manufacturers are still making quite conventional looking EVs (most of the i3's weirdness was just wilfully weird rather than particularly innovative) and even when there are more optimised designs about it will take a while before what you can do with an electric powertrain looks "normal" and what you have to do with an ICE one looks "old fashioned".

This. Early cars looked like ‘horse less carriages’ for that reason, but now they look odd to us.

[Welshbeef]

Leon R said:

Earthdweller said:

I’d actually rather have an electric car that looks like a 3 series .. has a 500 mile range and about 200bhp

A 500bhp 0-60 4s electric car for 100k doesn’t interest me at all

^This.

I don't think an electric car is ever going to excite me enough to have it as a fun car so huge power does not matter to me at all, I would take range over power every time.

Agree - though sadly I’d wager 15 years from now there will be no option.

[Limpet]

Earthdweller said:

I’d actually rather have an electric car that looks like a 3 series .. has a 500 mile range and about 200bhp

A 500bhp 0-60 4s electric car for 100k doesn’t interest me at all

I agree, and have often thought the same.

200 or so bhp is plenty for a family car or daily driver for most people. A better range and more accessible purchase price would be far greater attractions than being able to worry a supercar off the lights.

An electric equivalent of a 320d at an equivalent price is what I guess I'm getting at,

[Jon_S_Rally]

LimaDelta said:

Whereas that's exactly why I did buy an i3. If I'm driving the 'car of the future' I want it to look like a spaceship!

Horses for courses I guess, but I don't see why designers need to be constrained by conventional thinking given there is no longer any need to house a lump of cast aluminum and a cooling system under the bonnet.

If BMW go back to conventional styling for their 'i' cars then my flirtation with the brand will be brief.

I think you're in the minority though. For many, it was just too "out there".

otolith said:

The problem with accommodating very different shaped hardware is that you can end up with a design that doesn't get the best packaging out of either.

People often are resistant to change - remember them calling Sierras "jelly moulds"? Manufacturers are still making quite conventional looking EVs (most of the i3's weirdness was just wilfully weird rather than particularly innovative) and even when there are more optimised designs about it will take a while before what you can do with an electric powertrain looks "normal" and what you have to do with an ICE one looks "old fashioned".

That is very true but, at the moment, that results in building multiple platforms. When the whole purpose of EVs is supposedly to save the planet, that seems a rather backward way to go. As we all know, the problem with cars goes way beyond emissions from driving. Emissions from manufacturing/recycling is also a huge issue, so making multiple platforms is really defeating the object of the whole exercise.

You are right, people are change averse and this is why I think it's probably helpful to stick with convention in terms of overall design as much as possible. This has two advantages - firstly, it means you can accommodate both EV and ICE powertrain while the technology improves and, secondly, it means that EVs are less 'frightening' to buyers. If it looks just like a normal car and offers the same range and performance, it's going to be much easier to convince them to switch. If it looks a bit demented (like the i3), it's just another thing for people to get over.

Once people are in EVs en masse (if that actually happens of course), then you can start to fiddle with the designs to take advantage of the smaller powertrain. Right now, the EV someone needs to build is still basically a Golf as we know it now, just with an electric powertrain and a range of 3-400 miles, all for about £20k. That, along with sensible infrastructure, is where the tipping point will come in my view. Though I still think we are putting a few too many eggs in the battery basket at the moment, especially having seen some of the prototypes for large scale 'mining' of the sea bed to keep up with demand for cobalt.

[GT119]

Bigger battery = increase in range AND as a by-product, an increase in power.
Assuming each axle is driven, the difference in size between a 100 hp and and 270 hp (peak power) electric motor is really not that great as the size is more a function of the continuous torque rating required for sustained cruising.
The extra performance is therefore almost free, so why would you not have it?

[otolith]

Leon R said:

Earthdweller said:

I’d actually rather have an electric car that looks like a 3 series .. has a 500 mile range and about 200bhp

A 500bhp 0-60 4s electric car for 100k doesn’t interest me at all

^This.

I don't think an electric car is ever going to excite me enough to have it as a fun car so huge power does not matter to me at all, I would take range over power every time.

But that's based on an internal combustion engine view of the world where if you want more power you have to install a larger and less fuel efficient engine and as a result your range goes down. Electric cars don't work like that, there isn't the same trade off in power and range. if you want more range you need to install a bigger battery, and if you do that you also get the ability to get more power out of it.