BMW i3

[techmaven]

Long range that comes at almost twice the price and lower efficiency is a complete waste for the daily commuters that account for 80% of all traffic on our roads. The 'majority of trips', as you say, is way within the range of the Leaf/i3/Spark/... If it wasn't, they would not have sold any of those. Don't assume your own needs are 'the majority of cases'. The average car in the US drives about 40 miles every day. That's a fact.

The EPA highway ratings are done at a very low speed. For those of us that travel on the highway on a regular basis, the Tesla Model S is likely more efficient than a Leaf and especially the i3 due to aerodynamics. That is not accurately captured by strictly comparing the EPA ratings. It is important to know the limits of the benchmarks.

Detailed Test Information

The average speed, even in the high speed test is under 50 mph.

 

[dsm363]

That's why a lot of people like to buy small cars, especially in countries where energy prices are higher than the US. There are many other advantages of small cars.



They are off, but so are the values for all cars. Comparing is perfectly valid because the relative difference is unchanged.



Long range that comes at almost twice the price and lower efficiency is a complete waste for the daily commuters that account for 80% of all traffic on our roads. The 'majority of trips', as you say, is way within the range of the Leaf/i3/Spark/... If it wasn't, they would not have sold any of those. Don't assume your own needs are 'the majority of cases'. The average car in the US drives about 40 miles every day. That's a fact.

That may be a fact but I and I bet countless others would never buy a car with a 60-80 mile range as the only car in the household if we had a choice. It is more than enough for most commutes though. A commuter car is very different than the only car for a family. Plus Americans like big cars so if we can create a big car that gets around 90 mpge then that is a good thing. Price will come down in time.

 

[wraithnot]

The EPA highway ratings are done at a very low speed. For those of us that travel on the highway on a regular basis, the Tesla Model S is likely more efficient than a Leaf and especially the i3 due to aerodynamics. That is not accurately captured by strictly comparing the EPA ratings. It is important to know the limits of the benchmarks.

Detailed Test Information

The average speed, even in the high speed test is under 50 mph.

That's a great point- assuming aerodynamics is the major issue at 70 mph and above, the Model S does appear to be more efficient than a LEAF or a Volt: http://www.teslamotors.com/sites/default/files/blog_attachments/the-slipperiest-car-on-the-road.pdf at 70 mph and 100 mph.

And based on this post and a little math, it looks like the model S is also more efficient than the BMW i3 if you go with the flow of traffic on most freeways in the US (70+ mph): BMW i3 Forum View topic - basic aerodynamics for i3

 

[David99]

The i3 isn't a long range car that will be driven for extended times at 70 mph and up. It's a city car, a commuter car, a car that is used for daily driving where the average speed is low and good amounts of stop and go in traffic. That's where it is abut 30% more efficient than the Model S. Driving in cities (which makes up the vast majority of traffic) is well below 70.

 

[stopcrazypp]

That's a great point- assuming aerodynamics is the major issue at 70 mph and above, the Model S does appear to be more efficient than a LEAF or a Volt: http://www.teslamotors.com/sites/default/files/blog_attachments/the-slipperiest-car-on-the-road.pdf at 70 mph and 100 mph.

And based on this post and a little math, it looks like the model S is also more efficient than the BMW i3 if you go with the flow of traffic on most freeways in the US (70+ mph): BMW i3 Forum View topic - basic aerodynamics for i3

I think you have to be careful about only considering aerodynamics. Rolling resistance still plays a factor, and the i3 has extremely low rolling resistance due to the low weight and the narrowest tires in its segment.

- - - Updated - - -

But the Leaf, and I3 in it's first month outsells the Model S.

The i3 sold 336 in the US its first month (May).
http://insideevs.com/bmw-i3-us-sales-may-2014/
Without even looking up the exact figure for Model S, I'm pretty sure that's less than the Model S.

i3 Q1 2014 sales worldwide (basically Europe given US didn't launch yet) was 2022. Model S European sales were 3063. So Model S is still leading despite the higher price tag.
http://insideevs.com/bmw-i3-sales-exceed-2000-units-q1-2014/

Have to note that the i3 sales also include the REx version (unfortunately it's not broken down), so it's not completely BEV vs BEV.

But the price gap between Model S, i3, Leaf is quite big (part of it is the bigger battery, but part of it is also because of the car size and also because of Tesla's margin requirements). The unanswered question is what would happen if the i3 or Leaf had an option for more range and how the market will react to that.

 

[TonyWilliams]

What I find interesting is that even though the i3's EPA/NEDC numbers are very close to the LEAF's, Tom, myself, and others are easily getting 100 miles and more out of a charge. Yes, it's perfect EV weather at the moment, but if I recall from the LEAF forums 100 miles was a milestone that very few achieved, and those that did worked very hard to do it.

The LEAF will do 100 miles when new at about 50 mph on level, dry, hard surface roadways with no wind and the heater off. Here are the esteemed members of the
Nissan Leaf 100 Mile Club.

 

[jerry33]

The average car in the US drives about 40 miles every day. That's a fact.

That's an average. If you drive one long drive a month and commute ten miles, the average is going to be well below 40. But you will still need the range on a regular basis. This business of "you only need a 50 mile EV" does no favours for EV adoption. It's 1970's EV thinking and mostly came about due to the technical limitations of the day.

- - - Updated - - -

The i3 isn't a long range car that will be driven for extended times at 70 mph and up. It's a city car, a commuter car, a car that is used for daily driving where the average speed is low and good amounts of stop and go in traffic. That's where it is abut 30% more efficient than the Model S. Driving in cities (which makes up the vast majority of traffic) is well below 70.

In other words, it's a "second car" and you need a real car as a primary car. I don't think that's the way to support EV adoption.

 

[techmaven]

The i3 isn't a long range car that will be driven for extended times at 70 mph and up. It's a city car, a commuter car, a car that is used for daily driving where the average speed is low and good amounts of stop and go in traffic. That's where it is abut 30% more efficient than the Model S. Driving in cities (which makes up the vast majority of traffic) is well below 70.

Many people commute on the highway at speeds higher than 55mph. The i3 has terrible aerodynamics and therefore, just stating that the i3 is more efficient is incredibly simplistic. There are plenty of people's commutes where the energy usage will be dominated by a highway portion. Even the road in front of my neighborhood has a 45 mph speed limit and the i3 is likely has lost all advantage on that road versus a Model S. It's only if your commute is dominated by stop and go where the i3 will do better.

I think you have to be careful about only considering aerodynamics. Rolling resistance still plays a factor, and the i3 has extremely low rolling resistance due to the low weight and the narrowest tires in its segment.

Rolling resistance does play a factor, but at around 40-45mph, the two are about equal. At a mere 55 mph, aerodynamics plays a significantly higher factor.

 

[ecarfan]

Saw my first i3 in real life yesterday while on vacation with my wife in London UK. It was parked just off Bayswater Road across the street from Hyde Park. Wife's reaction: "What the heck?". My reaction: "Looks like the photos, not my cup of tea".

Regardless, kudos to BMW for the body material innovations. But please make an "i5" that looks like a beautiful BMW and give it 200 miles of EV range and high speed charging capability (given the recent stories about BMW talking to Tesla about the Supercharger network maybe that will happen!). That would be real competition to Tesla's upcoming Gen III / "Model 3" car. Competition is good.

(Update 06-18-2014) At the Sofitel at Heathrow airport in London there are huge i3 and i8 ads in the hallway you walk through from the airport before reaching the lobby and there is an i3 car sitting inside near the lobby. It's locked and plugged in. No one around to talk about it. At the Oslo, Norway, airport there are more huge BMW i3 ads, as well as ads for the VW e-Golf and e-Up).

That is a lot of expensive advertising that makes me chuckle. Tesla is selling lots of cars spending nothing on traditional advertising.

 

[surfingslovak]

Many people commute on the highway at speeds higher than 55mph. The i3 has terrible aerodynamics and therefore, just stating that the i3 is more efficient is incredibly simplistic. There are plenty of people's commutes where the energy usage will be dominated by a highway portion.

For what it's worth, my average over the first 950 miles is 263 Wh/mile. The majority of my driving is on the freeway at speeds between 70 and 80 mph.

Even the road in front of my neighborhood has a 45 mph speed limit and the i3 is likely has lost all advantage on that road versus a Model S. It's only if your commute is dominated by stop and go where the i3 will do better.

I'm sorry but this is just blatantly incorrect. If you would like to write off a vehicle as a glorified golf cart, go ahead, but please don't use a straw man argument to support your opinion.

Rolling resistance does play a factor, but at around 40-45mph, the two are about equal. At a mere 55 mph, aerodynamics plays a significantly higher factor.

While this is generally true, we all would benefit from a more systematic approach. I personally like what Tony Williams initiated with the LEAF and the RAV4 EV. Drive the vehicle at different constant speeds over a controlled stretch of the road, and determine real-world energy efficiency and range. It's quite useful and allows an apples-to-apples comparison. Otherwise, it's just one opinion against another, and that won't be particularly helpful.

 

[EVNow]

What I find interesting is that even though the i3's EPA/NEDC numbers are very close to the LEAF's, Tom, myself, and others are easily getting 100 miles and more out of a charge. Yes, it's perfect EV weather at the moment, but if I recall from the LEAF forums 100 miles was a milestone that very few achieved, and those that did worked very hard to do it.

Not really. In nice weather it is easy to get 100 miles in Leaf. I do it all the time in summer - without trying (based on m/kWh).

update : Anything above 4.8 m/kWh in Leaf equates to > 100 miles of range. I average over 5 m/kWh in summer months.

 

[woof]

Not really. In nice weather it is easy to get 100 miles in Leaf. I do it all the time in summer - without trying (based on m/kWh).

update : Anything above 4.8 m/kWh in Leaf equates to > 100 miles of range. I average over 5 m/kWh in summer months.

Cool, then it's not so hard then...I guess I'm misremembering the early MNL discussions about really reaching 100 miles (not just on the GOM).

For me the i3 is averaging around 5.1 m/kWh at the moment (60 mile round trip, 50/50 mix of highway and backroads, and a few urban miles). The high is 6.1 when I take all backroads, and the low is 4.5 on a torrential rainy almost flooding day on the highway. Water is expensive to push out of the way!

 

[Dave EV]

Cool, then it's not so hard then...I guess I'm misremembering the early MNL discussions about really reaching 100 miles (not just on the GOM).

There's less than 100 MNL forum members who have bragged about getting to 100 miles on a single charge. FWIW, the farthest I've gone is in the low 70s, but would have made it to the mid 80s before having to call the tow truck.

It's not hard to do if you have roads where you can maintain a fairly constant speed under 50 mph. Frequent and rapid stops or freeway speeds make it impossible.

 

[Ames]

I test drove the BMW i3 over the weekend at their test drive event in San Diego. Here are some impressions/observations:

2. I was disappointed with the driving/handling. It felt like I was driving on thin wheels and it lacked the stability of a normal car. I think BMW went with the super thin wheels to increase range, but it really affected the ride/handling quality for me. The super thin wheels don’t give the car the needed traction/stability and as a result I was left with a “something missing” feeling from the car. It felt like something was taken out of a normal car and I was driving something cheaper, more inferior.

To highlight what you are saying about handling of THE i3, check out this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pTZQF1DHyk

The i3 Looks very unstable when compared with other EV's. Notice the Tesla is completely un-phased by any of the tests...

Alex

 

[PokerBroker]

People continue to insist on comparing two cars that aren't even in the same class. I went and drove the i3 and it is not a Model S. It serves a completely different market segment and customer. Why do we insist on creating an "electric vehicle" class?

 

[dsm363]

People continue to insist on comparing two cars that aren't even in the same class. I went and drove the i3 and it is not a Model S. It serves a completely different market segment and customer. Why do we insist on creating an "electric vehicle" class?

People constantly compared the Karma and Model S too. The i3 base version at least is an expensive EV as well. I agree though one is a commuter car and the other is a large sedan.

 

[brianman]

Not really. In nice weather it is easy to get 100 miles in Leaf. I do it all the time in summer - without trying (based on m/kWh).
update : Anything above 4.8 m/kWh in Leaf equates to > 100 miles of range. I average over 5 m/kWh in summer months.

I'm confused by these units. Are you using "m" for "mile" here rather than "meter"?

 

[AEdennis]

I'm confused by these units. Are you using "m" for "mile" here rather than "meter"?

On Teslas we see wh/mile in the US (I'm sure it's wh/KM elsewhere.) Other cars (like BMW use the figure of Miles per kWh or kilometers per kWh)...

 

[brianman]

On Teslas we see wh/mile in the US (I'm sure it's wh/KM elsewhere.) Other cars (like BMW use the figure of Miles per kWh or kilometers per kWh)...

Right. My point is that "m/kWh" is, um, "unusual" if "miles per kilowatt-hour" is the intended meaning. The standard notation would be "mi/kWh" for that meaning.

 

[surfingslovak]

Right. My point is that "m/kWh" is, um, "unusual" if "miles per kilowatt-hour" is the intended meaning. The standard notation would be "mi/kWh" for that meaning.

That's correct, but I think some of these cars display m/kWh for brevity on the dash. And forum members likely use the same shorthand, however incorrect it may be formally.