A BMW Executive Seemingly Wants To Distance The Brand From The Iconic i3, And That’s Foolish

[SSi3]

https://www.theautopian.com/a-bmw-e...e-brand-from-the-iconic-i3-and-thats-foolish/

 

[eNate]

There's no doubt the i3 is a polarizing creature. Heck, I was definitely in the "not a fan" camp on this one before I was in the market, when the i3 replaced the more traditional looking BMW ActiveE test sleds back in 2013.

I don't believe the buying public is ready for what the i3 offers -- not aesthetically. The greater mindset has defined what a car should look like. Today. Over time that will shift, just as it shifted from the great hood lines and fins of the 50s, and has gradually shifted from sedans towards SUVs over the past two decades.

A decade from now, EVs that match the i3's silhouette will be the norm, and the public will not only accept them, but come to understand the benefits of a more compact vehicle. Maybe that won't be true of BMW's performance-oriented offerings, but I think there will be plenty of ID.2s, Model 2s, Volvo EV30s, etc. that will be a popular pick.

 

[Arm]

It wouldn't have been hard at all to modernize and refresh the i3 to what people may like today. But then again, the general population's taste sucks bigtime. I mean, look at some of the incredibly ugly cars coming out today from Nissan, Infiniti, Toyota, BMW, etc. Hideous beyond belief.

As far as dynamics go, there is nothing that the i3 couldn't have had fixed dynamically. The chassis is INCREDIBLY stiff. It's the only car I've ever driven where when turning into another street left or right while going into a dip causes absolutely ZERO body torsion, creaking, etc. of the doors and so on. I've driven pretty much the entire line up of BMW's from M2s to 3 series to 5 to X...none of them are as fun or as enjoyable to drive as this car.

BMW, like many automakers, is run by decrepit, closed-minded individuals who think they are experts at sussing out what is good and what isn't. The i3's failure is a glaring example of how they...not the car...f-ked things up.

 

[eNate]

I think we also have to acknowledge the i3 wasn't designed for scaled up production and was therefore relatively expensive to produce. I don't have a clue what (if anything) BMW could have done to address that and keep the carbon fiber body.

Most other EV entrants seem to make cuts here and there in order to offset the cost of the battery, while the i3 went the opposite direction and doubled down on product goo-gaw.

I think a "real" BMW i3 replacement would unfortunately bring us a more conventional steel unibody vehicle.

 

[Arm]

I think we also have to acknowledge the i3 wasn't designed for scaled up production and was therefore relatively expensive to produce. I don't have a clue what (if anything) BMW could have done to address that and keep the carbon fiber body.

Most other EV entrants seem to make cuts here and there in order to offset the cost of the battery, while the i3 went the opposite direction and doubled down on product goo-gaw.

I think a "real" BMW i3 replacement would unfortunately bring us a more conventional steel unibody vehicle.

To be honest, I think this is more of a myth than reality. There is no way BMW would continue producing a car that loses money every year (especially as much as they claimed).

This car already had the tooling and material in place to continue past 2021 and they didn't need to do much to improve it. The cost for improvement would have been minimal at this point in time as a refresh externally and internally (screen, interface, etc.) would be FAR less expensive than any upfront costs they had.

I get it that carbon fiber isn't cheap but it's also outrageously exaggerated in terms of cost. The cost margins they complain about are far less than what we think they are...they are penny counters that's the problem. And that's why BMW's current EV line-up is pretty sad and completely void of any innovation or excitement.

 

[eNate]

I would guess it's more about inability to scale without adding a second production line, with the price required to sell the i3 at vs. the i4, or vs. EVs with more room and more range, and the profitability of dedicating the space and staff to i3 production vs. repurposing it for a vehicle with higher margins (and/or higher production volumes).

That $11k discount they were offering in the US in the last years wasn't just BMW being generous, it was them trying to move a slow moving product in the face of similarly priced competition that was proving more popular with mainstream buyers.

 

[Arm]

I would guess it's more about inability to scale without adding a second production line, with the price required to sell the i3 at vs. the i4, or vs. EVs with more room and more range, and the profitability of dedicating the space and staff to i3 production vs. repurposing it for a vehicle with higher margins (and/or higher production volumes).

That $11k discount they were offering in the US in the last years wasn't just BMW being generous, it was them trying to move a slow moving product in the face of similarly priced competition that was proving more popular with mainstream buyers.

I would venture to say that $11k discount was something they had to do when they realized they've not spent a dime marketing the i3 in a way shape or form while the competition has been. BMW put less than zero effort in marketing or advertising this car. No one will buy a car when they don't know it exists.

The cost of a production line is low compared to developing new tooling and processes. At that point, it's a matter of duplicating what you already have.