More details on the 2017 i3

BMW i3 Forum

Help Support BMW i3 Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

jadnashuanh

Well-known member
Joined
May 22, 2014
Messages
5,192
Location
Nashua, NH USA
This just got posted on the Bimmerfest site: http://www.bimmerfest.com/news/910420/2017-bmw-i3-comes-with-50-more-battery/

A 50% increased range, few more standard features, optional sunroof, and more. The new batteries are heavier but sit in the same space, so probably includes new springs and shocks. The charging circuits are the same, so full recharge now rated at about 4.5-hours, and more details in that post. Pricing to come.
 
jadnashuanh,

You are correct that the 33 kWh battery is indeed heavier, 162-170 lb heavier than the 22 kWh pack by my calculations. Perhaps this added weight contributes to the fact that a 50% increase in stored energy (33 kWh versus 22 kWh) only results in a 40% increase in range (114 miles versus 81 miles) in the BEV.

The challenge for buyers/lesses will be to justify the loss of efficiency (Wh/mi) resulting from adding battery or REX weight to the base 2,799 lb BEV.

Steve
 
So many things are a compromise. Weight messes with range, so while adding more battery capacity helps, it also hurts. Depends on your preference what's most important.
 
And it will be available in BLUE!!!

Wow did I nail that prediction or what?

http://www.mybmwi3.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3715&p=33134&hilit=blue#p33134
 
We have different information here in Germany - official BMW statement.
94 Ah BEV weighs 50kg more than the 60 Ah BEV.
However, this is not only because of the heavier battery. The new models include DC charging and 3 phase 11 kW charging, which also add some weight.

Useable capacity increased from 19 to 29 kWh, power consumption reduced from 12.9 to 12.6 kWh / 100km because of improved power electronics and motor mapping. This adds up to 56% more range.
European driving cycle now 300 instead of 190km ( +57% ), but BMW states that now 200km are a realistig driving range now.

Frank
 
fdl1409 said:
94 Ah BEV weighs 50kg more than the 60 Ah BEV.
That make more sense than the entire 150 kg (330 lb) BEV weight increase being due to a heavier battery pack.

fdl1409 said:
The new models include DC charging and 3 phase 11 kW charging, which also add some weight.
North American (NA) i3's have had DC charging as standard since 2015, so that can't have been part of the weight increase for NA models. A 2017 NA i3 will almost certainly not include a 3-phase charger because 3-phase power isn't available in NA homes, so no increase in the NA weight could be attributed to a 3-phase charger.

fdl1409 said:
Useable capacity increased from 19 to 29 kWh, power consumption reduced from 12.9 to 12.6 kWh / 100km because of improved power electronics and motor mapping. This adds up to 56% more range.
The NA press release lists 27.2 kWh as the usable capacity for 2017 NA i3's. Could European models have less unavailable capacity?

The NA press release did not mention reduced power consumption although I would expect that to happen as electronics are improved. However, the NA press release listed the power consumption at 27 kWh/mile which is inconsistent with the 27.2 kWh capacity which would result in a 101 mile range rather than an EPA range of 114 miles for the BEV as stated in the NA press release.

The NA BEV's range increased (114 mi - 81 mi) / 81 mi = 41% increase in range which is nowhere near the 56% stated in the German press release. Maybe the differences between the EPA and very inaccurate NEDC ratings explain this discrepancy.

fdl1409 said:
European driving cycle now 300 instead of 190km ( +57% ), but BMW states that now 200km are a realistic driving range now.
Yet the NA press release states a BEV range of only 183 km (114 mi).

Lots of discrepancies that I'd like to understand. I think that Jim might be correct in assuming that the suspension might have been beefed up to handle the addition weight unless the gross weight with a full load has remained the same. If so, that would reduce the allowed cargo weight considerably.

For me, a 41% range increase isn't worth the 13% weight increase. If current battery cell technologies dictate than increased battery cell charge density must be accompanied by an increased weight density, a significant technological leap needs to occur to reduce the weight density so that EV drivers aren't saddled with less efficient heavyweight cars.
 
We get plenty of inconsistencies here too.

Press release as of today states useable capacity 29 kWh.
But then, technical data 27,2 kWh:

https://www.press.bmwgroup.com/deutschland/article/detail/T0259598DE/technische-daten-bmw-i3-94ah-gueltig-ab-07/2016

Scroll down, click "Technische Daten BMW i3 ( 94 Ah ), gültig ab 7/2016"

A lot of those data seem nonsensical / inconsistent:

EU cycle range:
- 60 Ah BEV 190 km
- 94 Ah BEV 312 km ( 300 with 20" wheels )
- 60 Ah REx 170 km
- 94 Ah REx 240 km ( 231 with 20" wheels )

Never ever, relation between BEV and REx can`t be true

Even more as further down power consumption in EU cycle is listed as:
- 60 AH REx 13.5 kWh / 100km
- 94 Ah REx 11.3 kWh / 100km ( 11.9 with 20" wheels )
- 60 Ah BEV 12.9
- 94 Ah BEV 12.6
Data for the 94 Ah REx can`t be correct.

Still, some facts are interesting and seem credible.
Weight for the 60 AH BEV now 1.205 kg, previously 1.195 kg.
94 Ah BEV 1.245 kg, which adds 40 kg for the 94 Ah Version.

For the REx versions, weight is listed as 1.340 kg for 60 Ah and 1.365 kg for 94 Ah, only 25 kg difference. Don`t believe that. Previously weight differnce BEV / REx was always 120 kg, here 135 kg.

Apparently quite a few mistakes.

Frank ( Tesla M3 ordered )
 
So how much more is it going to cost? Will people pay another $3000 on top of the MSRP? BMW already have hard time selling i3 without huge discounts and government incentives.
 
In Germany, the price for the 94 Ah BEV and REx is 1.200 € higher than the old 60 Ah - less than we expected. 1.200 € is 1.390 $ as of today.

Frank
 
Considering that the cost of the batteries is supposed to be trending down, asking more for them seems a bit annoying.

But, until the official prices are released, everything is still speculation. Some markets show weight loaded, some unloaded, so that might account for some of the differences (i.e., include a nominal driver verses empty).

From what I read, the EU driving cycle is weighted quite a bit differently than the USA cycle, so a press release showing a range might be misinterpreted easily, especially if not tailored for a specific market.

They still have months before you'll be able to buy one off the lot, but dealers may start taking orders soon, so the prices and specs should crystallize fairly soon. Until then, who knows.
 
Apparently no retrofit in the US. Strange, considering it's the strongest market.

http://www.bmwblog.com/2016/05/02/bmw-i3-battery-retrofit-not-available-u-s-market/
 
psquare said:
Apparently no retrofit in the US. Strange, considering it's the strongest market.

http://www.bmwblog.com/2016/05/02/bmw-i3-battery-retrofit-not-available-u-s-market/
While there may be a secondary market for the used battery pack in the i3, to swap, you're essentially paying retail for a new set, the labor to install it, and the required reprogramming of the vehicle (may or may not be compatible with the on-board computers as they exist), and maybe some of the other electronics (they did say the new controller is more efficient, probably h/w verses all s/w), and because it is heavier, maybe new springs, resulting in maybe the f-r heights being different and then needing to readjust the headlight leveling system logic and adjustment, and the list goes on. It doesn't seem like a stretch to say that, done right, and BMW tends to only do things 'right', that it would not be cost effective to swap the batteries. It's not like putting a higher capacity battery in your cellphone.
 
jadnashuanh said:
psquare said:
Apparently no retrofit in the US. Strange, considering it's the strongest market.

http://www.bmwblog.com/2016/05/02/bmw-i3-battery-retrofit-not-available-u-s-market/
While there may be a secondary market for the used battery pack in the i3, to swap, you're essentially paying retail for a new set, the labor to install it, and the required reprogramming of the vehicle (may or may not be compatible with the on-board computers as they exist), and maybe some of the other electronics (they did say the new controller is more efficient, probably h/w verses all s/w), and because it is heavier, maybe new springs, resulting in maybe the f-r heights being different and then needing to readjust the headlight leveling system logic and adjustment, and the list goes on. It doesn't seem like a stretch to say that, done right, and BMW tends to only do things 'right', that it would not be cost effective to swap the batteries. It's not like putting a higher capacity battery in your cellphone.


Hmm, that's just pure speculation. If it were such a headache, then why offer it and not get people to buy a new car? What you're saying doesn't make total sense to me.

However what does make sense is -from a sustainability perspective - to swap batteries in an existing car, rather than offering no swap and push customers to manufacture and sell a brand new vehicle. On the other hand, BMW wont make any special offers here, that's for sure. And as has been pointed out before: an i3 will last a long time due to its design. A battery swap can give it a new lease of life and lift resale value. Who knows?

It's too early to speculate, but fact is that -to begin with- no retrofits will be offered in the US.
 
Next question:

Never mind the batteries, will the improved efficiency be retrofittable to the original i3?
 
A replacement battery will likely be available, should the existing one become deficient, but maybe not with the newest, highest performance batteries available at the time. Changing say your 4-cylider BMW motor to a 6 or 8 might be possible, but lots of things need to be changed. It is not clear, since the new one weighs more (how much would be the main issue) how much else needs to be changed to make it work properly. At least some of the software, and maybe some of the other hardware to account for and detect the larger capacity battery pack.
 
jadnashuanh said:
A replacement battery will likely be available, should the existing one become deficient, but maybe not with the newest, highest performance batteries available at the time. Changing say your 4-cylider BMW motor to a 6 or 8 might be possible, but lots of things need to be changed. It is not clear, since the new one weighs more (how much would be the main issue) how much else needs to be changed to make it work properly. At least some of the software, and maybe some of the other hardware to account for and detect the larger capacity battery pack.

If there is a difference in weight of 50-100 kg, the question is to what extend this would change the car. This could be a difference in weight that would easily apply to 4 heavy passengers!. A software update would need to be applied anyway, so this would be part of it. Comparing it to changing a 4 cylinder engine to something higher is clearly apples/pears, because such a swap would mean something of a higher magnitude, which would bring all sorts of other necessary changes and risks (brakes, consumption, acceleration, top speed, in-car safety). Attempting a comparison, this would be more like the hypothetical change of the tank to another one with the same volume, but taking higher capacity fuel.

Anyway: According to the fairly reliable "BMW Blog", BMW has stated that a retrofit (not a swap for cars with defective or deficient batteries) will be offered in some markets. For now, the US is not one of these. Once pricing for a retrofit becomes clearer we will all know how beneficial -or not- a swap will be. I will also contact my dealership soon to find out. Not that I am interested at the moment, though.

My guess is that BMW is feeling its way into this because, as you say, it could mean more than a pure battery swap (how much more is speculation at this point). This would mean additional training and safeguarding at dealerships in those markets. Given BMW's ongoing cautious behaviour with repairs (central approval before work is started), they might want to test it within a smaller market first before offering this in the US, which represents roughly 50% of i3 sales volume currently.
 
jadnashuanh said:
This just got posted on the Bimmerfest site: http://www.bimmerfest.com/news/910420/2017-bmw-i3-comes-with-50-more-battery/

A 50% increased range, few more standard features, optional sunroof, and more. The new batteries are heavier but sit in the same space, so probably includes new springs and shocks. The charging circuits are the same, so full recharge now rated at about 4.5-hours, and more details in that post. Pricing to come.

I think all these are great additions. I for one had always advocated certain features should have been standard rather that tied to an "interior" selection.

My main wish, after living with my i3 for one year, is that there is a definite retune of the suspension and steering. I know that is not a shared opinion, but that will determine whether I trade into the 2017 year of i3 with great excitement or move on to another choice. That with the added range would make the i3 a great electric car option imho.
 
I will look again at this new 2017 i3.

All EV cars and trucks will be allowed in all bus lanes as well restricted bus only lanes and car poll lanes with only the driver required soon. Next they will allow free parking in the CBD as New Zealand only has 1,000 odd EV cars and the government want 65,000 by 2021. It will not happen unless the prices drop or a lot of second hand Ev's come in from Japan.
 
BMW UK published the 2017 i3 specs. These specs verify that both 60 aH and 94 aH 2017 BEV's and REx's will be available in the U.K. I believe I've read that this will be true in North America as well.

The specs show that the 2017 60 aH i3 BEV is 10 kg (22 lb) heavier than the 2016 model as indicated on the BMW UK Website (additional standard equipment?). The 2017 94 aH BEV is only 40 kg (88 lb) heavier than the 2017 60 aH BEV, or 50 kg (110 lb) heavier than the 2016 BEV. The 2017 94 aH model now includes 3-phase AC charging as standard, so part of its weight increase is due to this additional standard equipment with the majority likely due to heavier 94 aH battery cells. With no 3-phase AC charging likely available in North American models, the 2017 94 aH North American BEV might be only 40 kg heavier than the 2016 BEV which is negligible if you don't consider its 0.1 second slower 0-100 kph (62 mph) time to be significant. We'll have to wait for detailed North American i3 specs to be released to know for certain.

The 94 aH battery pack's rated voltage is 7 volts less than that of the 60 aH battery pack (a bit different battery cell electrochemistry?). This means that the 94 aH battery pack would need to deliver a bit more current to produce the same power compared with the 60 aH battery pack. This might explain why (94 aH/60 aH) x 21.6 kWh = 33.8 kWh is a bit more than the 33.2 kWh gross capacity of the 94 aH battery pack. All fairly minor stuff…

Another interesting change is a 12% increase in the REx engine's power at 500 RPM higher. Whether this indicates an increase in its electrical output isn't clear, but why wouldn't it? It's also not clear whether 2017 North American REx models will share this REx engine power increase, but why wouldn't they? With the increased battery capacity and REx output, even with no standard ability to turn on the REx engine manually in North American models, once the REx engine starts, one should be able to drive a bit faster and/or ascend a bit steeper inclines for a bit longer distance before a low battery pack charge level would reduce the electric motor's power and thus the car's speed. That still isn't as good as manual control, but it would be a step in the right direction.
 
Back
Top