Basic Physics...

[jadnashuanh]

It sounds like people are expecting something designed like the Volt, whose range extender is over 3x larger, requires a lot of support equipment, adds a bunch more weight, and makes the battery function a much smaller part of the overall range component...to do that would require the i3 to be a very different car, likely actually have a normal radiator, and all of the things necessary for a typical ICE, in addition to the electric propulsion...IOW, something more akin to the i8 (or on a more pedestrian level, the Volt).

I expect that BMW will come out with some additional models that are more capable for long road trips, but that isn't what the i3 was stated to be in all of the normal print - they call it a city car, one person's expression maybe indicating otherwise doesn't make it something else. Running around a city, or its suburbs, with the average 34-mile/day usage, you'll never run into the issue of running on the equivalent of fumes. And, even if you could turn the REx on earlier, if you are going to press the range, you could still easily end up in the same boat - but, with no fuel left, AND the battery nearly empty. The drag goes up at the square of the speed, so a little faster makes a BIG difference, and the numbers posted were for no wind...try driving into a steady 20mph wind or more, and that 40mph looks like 60 (forget the units, but 40^40=1600 and 60^60=3600, just by that headwind, your load went up over 100%.

Drag on a city car which is expected to be at lower speeds most of the time isn't normally a big deal - making it taller means better visibility, easier ingress/egress, shorter length for easier parking and a smaller turning circle, and a convenient height load floor. Sure, if you wanted something faster and sleeker, the i8 is, but in addition to (nearly) the same power output on the electric motor (and it has a 2-speed transmission to help at higher speeds), it has the ability to over double the total Hp if you activate the ICE...it won't be in the same situation since it has a MUCH bigger engine AND a much bigger fuel tank - it is designed for a different task.

When the mileometer and the battery indication are depleted, what do you expect? It's not like it's not there in plain sight - they don't hide it. Running around town, the REx will likely provide all of the power required to maintain its city car role, and is a true battery range extender - not so IF you try to make those miles long-distance and at higher speeds, and even worse, long grades at speed maybe into a headwind.

 

[Chrisn]

@ jadnashuanh:

Please point to the "normal print" from BMW documentation/marketing material that supports your assertions. I just looked at my window sticker and the BMW NA information pages for the i3 REX:

http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Content/Vehicles/2014/i3/BMWi3RangeExtender/default.aspx

Also look at the official i3 REX brochure.

Frankly, I've scanned the Owners Manual (not every word, admittedly) and can't find any reference to it being designed as a City-only or primarily-for-cities car, or any indication that REX mode is materially different than EV mode.

BMW's description (in official product brochure) is as follow: "When the initial charge is depleted to approximately 5%, the Range Extender starts, seamlessly and smoothly, to maintain the battery's state of charge. This adds 50-75 miles per fill-up..." Caveat Emptor, I guess....

In terms of i3 versus Volt, the real irony is that the Volt HAS ALWAYS HAD a Mountain Mode, despite the larger engine. For all the reasons you list, the i3 is the car that can't function properly WITHOUT a Mountain Mode.

Agreed that the total energy (electrons plus gas) is fixed, so Mountain Mode can't extend range forever. Also acknowledge that driving faster (in any car) is exponentially bad for efficiency. Duh. None of that argues against the necessity of a Mountain Mode. Mountain Mode also would not prevent hyper milers from using ECO Pro + and Cruise control at 52 MPH (or whatever) should they so choose.....

 

[RJSATLBA]

@ jadnashuanh:

Please point to the "normal print" from BMW documentation/marketing material that supports your assertions. I just looked at my window sticker and the BMW NA information pages for the i3 REX:

http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Content/Vehicles/2014/i3/BMWi3RangeExtender/default.aspx

In terms of i3 versus Volt, the real irony is that the Volt HAS ALWAYS HAD a Mountain Mode, despite the larger engine. For all the reasons you list, the i3 is the car that can't function properly WITHOUT a Mountain Mode.

.....

Chrisn, out of curiosity I've had a quick look at the page you gave and then followed a number of the links. All the shots in the media gallery are in an urban environment as are the two videos, in one of the videos the phrase "perfect for the urban environment" occurs. No shots or clips on freeways and, you've guessed it, not a mountain in sight. It's difficult to see how you can claim there's nothing in BMW's spin that gives any clue that the i3, with or without REx, is primarily a city vehicle.

The i3 REx most certainly can function perfectly well without a mountain mode, a regular contributor from a less than flat part of Germany seems to be delighted with his car. There's nothing wrong with the REx in this department except in N America, where it could be resolved by a simple parameter change. Perhaps you should be addressing your anger at the relevant US or state legislators. There's nothing wrong with the car that couldn't be fixed at the next software update, they might even be able to retrieve the 'full size' tanks from a skip at the docks.

 

[FrancisJeffries]

I don’t share jadnashuanh’s jaundiced view of the Rex for long-range motoring, which I think is coloured by the ludicrous constraint on the use of the Rex until the state of charge (SOC) has fallen below 6% in North America. Here in the UK we don’t have the big climbs at high speed on freeways which are so punishing for the US version of the Rex when you’re down to 6% SOC. The situation here is far better, because the Rex can be engaged to maintain the SOC as soon as it has fallen to 80%, which radically improves its usefulness. Basic physics still applies, but now it can help, not hinder. Notwithstanding the i3’s acknowledged shortcomings on longer journeys, I still think it’s better than having a second ICE - or hiring one - for them.

For example, on holidays, I sometimes make a 300-mile journey from near London to the English Lake District. It will not be difficult to set out with full tank and battery, and to use the Rex as much as possible on the journey by stopping every hour to top up the tank – not a big problem, it seems to me. (There are very few CCS points at the moment along much of the route, and four 5-minute stops for fuel for the Rex seems preferable to four 20-minute stops for rapid recharges of the BEV at 60 to 70 mile intervals.)

Suppose when I get there I decide to drive from Seathwaite (the wettest village in England!) in Borrowdale to Buttermere. That involves using one of the Lake District’s lower passes (the Honister), which peaks at about 300m (230m above the valley) and falls again to roughly the same altitude at Buttermere. It is nearly impossible to drive up it quickly because it is twisty, frequently has sheep strolling around, rocks on the road, and is so narrow that slowing for cars coming the other way is common.

Let’s say it’s a total ascent of 230m up to the summit, and that the car’s mass including two passengers is around 1500kg. The work done to climb the pass comes out at 230*1500*9.81 = 3,384,450 Joules (9.81 is 1g in MKS units). Now 1 watt-second = 1 Joule, so the work done to lift the car to the top is 3,384,450/3,600,000 = 0.94kWh, almost exactly 5% of the available battery capacity.
Now consider the help given by the Rex on the way up. 0.94kWh was needed to lift the car. It did so within, say, 6 minutes at 60km/hr (that’s improbably fast, btw!) - a tenth of an hour. So the rate of working (the power needed from the Rex engine) is 0.94/(1/10) = 9.4kW. That’s much less than the 25kW which the Rex can deliver, so no battery at all was used during the ascent.

Things get interesting at the top of the pass, still using the Rex. As I descend the 230m again, all that 0.94kWh must be regenerated into the battery, which therefore gets charged up by perhaps 0.75kWh, allowing for losses. So after getting into Buttermere, I have managed to increase the battery charge by about 4% simply by getting there using the Rex. What’s more, it’ll gain another 4% on the way back! :lol:

I’ll have used up some fuel from the tank, of course, but petrol (gas) refuelling is not usually a problem.

 

[RJSATLBA]

Cunning!

 

[cwerdna]

@ jadnashuanh:

Please point to the "normal print" from BMW documentation/marketing material that supports your assertions. I just looked at my window sticker and the BMW NA information pages for the i3 REX:

http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Content/Vehicles/2014/i3/BMWi3RangeExtender/default.aspx

In terms of i3 versus Volt, the real irony is that the Volt HAS ALWAYS HAD a Mountain Mode, despite the larger engine. For all the reasons you list, the i3 is the car that can't function properly WITHOUT a Mountain Mode.

.....

Chrisn, out of curiosity I've had a quick look at the page you gave and then followed a number of the links. All the shots in the media gallery are in an urban environment as are the two videos, in one of the videos the phrase "perfect for the urban environment" occurs. No shots or clips on freeways and, you've guessed it, not a mountain in sight. It's difficult to see how you can claim there's nothing in BMW's spin that gives any clue that the i3, with or without REx, is primarily a city vehicle.

http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Content/Vehicles/2014/i3/BMWi3RangeExtender/ModelHighlights/default.aspx shows a shot on a highway.

The launch film at http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Content/Vehicles/2014/i3/BMWi3RangeExtender/MediaGallery.aspx most definitely has some highway at ~around 0:17. I believe some of it is on some of the freeways surrounding downtown LA, possibly 101 or the 110. (I haven't been to LA in a few years.)

(I do see some LA city scenes. Flower is a real street in downtown LA and the street signs are that color.)

BMW decided to put on a 170 hp electric motor, which is FAR more than most other BEVs sold in the US which aren't really even pitched as "city vehicles". You can see our EV/PHEV choices at http://insideevs.com/monthly-plug-in-sales-scorecard/,

 

[I33t]

http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Content/Vehicles/2014/i3/BMWi3RangeExtender/ModelHighlights/default.aspx shows a shot on a highway.

C'mon, you're clutching at straws! Yes you can find a (very) few freeway scenes by trawling through ALL of the presented media. Without a single doubt BMW is presenting the i3 as a urban vehicle, not a freeway cruiser. Anything else is personal projection, this is not your father's Chevy!

By all means berate BMW for tinkering with the Rex tank and programming in the US, but let's stop kidding ourselves that they are marketing this car as a freeway machine. It's a fast accelerating city car.

 

[mindmachine]

http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Content/Vehicles/2014/i3/BMWi3RangeExtender/ModelHighlights/default.aspx shows a shot on a highway.

C'mon, you're clutching at straws! Yes you can find a (very) few freeway scenes by trawling through ALL of the presented media. Without a single doubt BMW is presenting the i3 as a urban vehicle, not a freeway cruiser. Anything else is personal projection, this is not your father's Chevy!

By all means berate BMW for tinkering with the Rex tank and programming in the US, but let's stop kidding ourselves that they are marketing this car as a freeway machine. It's a fast accelerating city car.

It all boils down to the crippling job BMW had to do to satisfy their greed for CARB tax credits that enable them to sell their less fuel efficient vehicles in CARB states in the USA. So instead of providing the same capabilities here in the USA and getting fewer CARB credits as a PHEV (vs BEVx rating they wanted) they opted to penalize i3 owners for their own financial gain. Dumb down the car at the expense of the consume and safety of use. People are humane and they will do things they should not in the name of greed ie:BMW in this case. :evil:

The car is capable enough the way it was designed, but not the way it has been crippled here. Oh and I forgot, BMW NA claimed the car can be driven across the USA, no problem. That was back in March/April of 2014 when the car was being introduced.

I suggest a class action lawsuit of all USA owners that do not live in a CARB state.

 

[Chrisn]

C'mon, you're clutching at straws! Yes you can find a (very) few freeway scenes by trawling through ALL of the presented media. Without a single doubt BMW is presenting the i3 as a urban vehicle, not a freeway cruiser....let's stop kidding ourselves that they are marketing this car as a freeway machine. It's a fast accelerating city car.

I would say it is you and the other apologists who are grabbing at straws. The claim was that the "normal print" made clear that this was a city car and not intended to be driven steadily at 70MPH on freeways. Perhaps other than golf carts, in the US there is no such thing as a "city car" (if by that you mean a car that cannot be safely driven on freeways). The normal and reasonable baseline assumption (given that we have >150K miles of freeways, virtually all of which have a speed limit of 65 MPH) is that a car can be driven safely on all public roads. Full stop.

It is intellectually dishonest to assert that, in this situation, the burden of proof should be on the consumer to discern the particular limitations of certain cars. The "normal print" had better be pretty prominent and unambiguous. Negative implications drawn from still frames of non-highway roads in ads are not "normal print." Give me a break.

 

[jadnashuanh]

The big differentiator between most of Europe and the USA is the size and population density. Is there anywhere in western Europe where you might be able to drive nearly 100-miles without coming across a small town? THen, throw in the fact that we have some pretty significant mountains without too many tunnels (not downplaying the Alps or any of the others in Europe) - the Rockies are newer, taller, and often steeper. The one US state of California is bigger then the entire country of Germany, and Texas is almost 25% larger than France, and that's only two states. So, I'm sure that there are places in Europe where the i3 isn't particularly well suited, just like there are in the USA. I think that you'll have to agree, regardless, though, that the i3 is a blast to drive when you aren't down to the last electron. Do yourself a favor, and don't let it get there just like you don't go around running your ICE out of fuel, don't run your i3 out of juice.

Bottom line, when the fuel (battery) gauge gets close to the zero point, and you still expect to go up that steep grade at speed with all of your creature comforts on, the REx won't keep up, and a BEV will just die at some point. That you let it get there, is a conscious decision, and should have been something you considered before you started. The choices are: find another route, go slower, charge sooner, take a different vehicle more suited to your expectations. The i3 in both forms, does with it was designed to do. Is BMW happy about having to make different software and hardware versions for the USA, I doubt it. They originally intended to have the models very close to identical (there will likely always be some country specific tweaks required - something that MIGHT go away if they can ever agree to a reciprocity deal for cars that's been talked for awhile).

The fact that elsewhere outside of the USA you can turn the REx on earlier still won't help if you've used up your fuel and are still then running on batteries...all the REx does is slow down the inevitable - you run out of power, unless you do something about it. If you're in a typical city environment, you probably will never experience any disappointments. YOu will if you treat it like an ICE, and expect to keep going.

In the example about driving to the Lakes District...most of that is relatively flat (well rolling hills where you can recoup some of the power used going up), and in those circumstances, it's likely that the REx can keep up whenever you turned it on.

I'm pretty sure that the BMW board of directors wouldn't have let them develop the I-series vehicles if they didn't think it was good for them overall. And, consider, a lot of the knowledge learned is being incorporated into the 'normal' line of cars (read some of the stories about the new 7-series). Except for maybe China and the Middle East, North America is probably the biggest purchaser of their bigger, gasoline-engine vehicles and without the credits, the fuel guzzler taxes on them that may be offset by the credits does come out of the purchaser's pocket one way or the other.

 

[cwerdna]

C'mon, you're clutching at straws! Yes you can find a (very) few freeway scenes by trawling through ALL of the presented media. Without a single doubt BMW is presenting the i3 as a urban vehicle, not a freeway cruiser....let's stop kidding ourselves that they are marketing this car as a freeway machine. It's a fast accelerating city car.

I would say it is you and the other apologists who are grabbing at straws. The claim was that the "normal print" made clear that this was a city car and not intended to be driven steadily at 70MPH on freeways. Perhaps other than golf carts, in the US there is no such thing as a "city car" (if by that you mean a car that cannot be safely driven on freeways). The normal and reasonable baseline assumption (given that we have >150K miles of freeways, virtually all of which have a speed limit of 65 MPH) is that a car can be driven safely on all public roads. Full stop.

It is intellectually dishonest to assert that, in this situation, the burden of proof should be on the consumer to discern the particular limitations of certain cars. The "normal print" had better be pretty prominent and unambiguous. Negative implications drawn from still frames of non-highway roads in ads are not "normal print." Give me a break.

I'm not the one grasping, RJSATLBA and I33t are the ones grasping by trying to infer limitations/intent by pointing out there were no shots of mountains and incorrectly pointing out there were no freeway shots.

As for city car, yeah, we do have vehicles that aren't freeway legal. For example, there are http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-speed_vehicle and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neighborhood_Electric_Vehicle. Probably one of the better known brands of NEVs are GEM cars: http://www.polaris.com/en-us/gem-electric-car. We have a whole bunch of them at my work to go between two sets of buildings. I've never driven them yet but I've seen some of our workers and parking valets (our parking at some of our buildings is too full) use them.

http://www.polaris.com/en-us/gem-electric-car/faqs mentions the GEM cars have a top speed of 25 mph.

 

[I33t]

Yes you are grasping.

You seem to want a high powered long range vehicle from the i3 and clearly it is not that car and was never represented or intended to be that car. Most people have no problem seeing that in the provided media, but some apparently only see what they want to see. If I'm an apologist, I am an apologist for common sense.

Finding a few instances of BMW displaying an i3 on a freeway or mountain road is not the same as BMW claiming this is the physics defying car you have in your mind. The physics are laid down by the battery capacity, size, power and weight of the vehicle.

Read the first post in this thread.

 

[RJSATLBA]

OK, this discussion about the limitations of the REx is running in parallel on several threads and I'll readily admit to having been devil's advocate when I've seen other contributors seeing it as a black and white issue. But clutching at straws - no, I have no need to clutch at anything because I'm fortunate to be in Europe where it isn't an issue.

If my memory is correct, the effect of the US spec changes would have been widely known to those who are readers of this blog before the first deliveries took place, so as one contributor has said, the deposits would have been refundable because the spec was different from the original spec at the time of ordering. For those who are not readers but who have suffered, I'd say that purchasing something that is a pretty radical advance solely on the basis of the vendors' claims is a high risk way to spend $50k+.

As is so often the case in life, this isn't a black and white issue, it's partly down to the legislation and the incentives it provides and partly down to the way BMW (and perhaps buyers) have taken advantage of those benefits. Opinions will inevitably vary on where the balance should be but it isn't all down to one side or the other.

Likewise, whatever may have been said by BMW, in print or in statements (whether from senior management or showroom staff) one can't get away from the basic physics. Two sayings come to mind, an old Yorkshire one, "You don't get owt for nowt," and one which gained some currency many years ago after an early UK mis-delling scandal, "If something sounds too good to be true, it probably is." Only the most fortunate ad men get paid to sell things that would sell themselves solely on their merits or value for money.

Is the car dangerous? I doubt it, there are many vehicles that are very good at what they do but wholly unsuited to other uses even though they might be legal.

Litigation? I stand by my view that the only certain winners are the lawyers.

Is it a real BMW? It's a departure in a new direction and cannot realistically have all the characteristics that aficionados value, it's a BMW EV.

Is it a superb car? It is for some but the fact that it may not be ideal for others does not mean it is a bad car, it is relatively specialised.

Would a week's holiday on a small, remote, cold, windy and probably wet island suit everybody? No but I'm looking forward to it. Bye for now!

 

[I33t]

If that island was Skye, Lewis, Harris or one of the other Outer Hebrides, it would suit me just fine

Enjoy your week!

 

[electricvirgin]

I was watching James May talk about city car on the TV last night (BBC2 9pm, its on iplayer) and something came up that seemed relevant.

In the UK in the 60's and 70's it was possible to buy a basic car on a motorcyle license at a low cost. The government of the day strangely insisted cars in this category could only have 3 wheels! This was the legislation that created (or at least encouraged) Reliant and Bond to make many 3 wheelers in this period, resulting in much hilarity as they toppled over around corners (not funny if you are in the car of course). Obviously this has changed now but its odd to think that st some point in the past it was thought to be logical.

I could not help thinking that this was a precedent for the sometimes ill considered rules that seem to have hobbled the i3 Rex in the USA? In my opinion its a bit harsh to blame BMW for trying to make the best of such a confusing system all the while engineering the car for other markets around the world with their own requirements. When everyone was speculating earlier this year what category the rex (and how this might differ by state) would fall into and what window sticker would be allowed and how many might be issued i started feeling more sympathy with all EV manufacturers for having to navigate such bureaucracy, surely it should be more transparent?

On balance (!) i think i would prefer the compromises of the rex relative to the much increased chance of my car rolling over with a 3 wheeler.

 

[RJBarry]

This is an urban car that isn't intended to be driven on highways?!

Warning: Sarcasm to follow.

I sure your right, but I'm still a little surprised. I mean, my test drive included the freeway and during this test drive, no disclaimer was given by the sales person. Heck, the dealership is (A) in the suburbs (B) at a the top of a mountain grade (C) off the highway. Why would they even sell such a car at such a crazy-stupid-dangerous locale? Seems dishonest.

Well, all of this must be just some silly misunderstanding. I mean, the salesperson (though claiming to be an i3 trained specialist) may just not have been aware that this car shouldn't have been taken on the freeway, or out of the city, or uphill. That is why marketing and salespeople are always protected by contracts! So, I'm sure there is something in the paperwork that I signed that will let me know that this car is an urban-only vehicle. After all, this is California, they put *everything* in the paperwork. Which make sense, after all, marketing is pretty irrelevant. If your product kills people you can't just say to a judge "well, we told people that it might kill them on a one page spread in MotorTrend magazine last April, so they should have known better. We're off the hook right?" Well I think not! So it must be in the paperwork.

OK... I've got the paperwork... checking... checking... oh look at this, I signed a piece of paper saying that I was aware I shouldn't put chains on the tires because they could damage the car. Looking... looking... hey I signed another a piece of paper saying that I was aware that spilling liquids in the trunk could cause damage to the battery... and probably a fiery death, I'm sure. Glad I re-read that one. Hey, here is something! Did you know that there are materials in this automobile that will probably cause me cancer!! Wow! They are really looking out for my safety! This is some pretty specific stuff.

Wait... nothing I signed said not to drive on the highway. Hmm... wait... this is California, *everything* is in the paperwork, right? So what am I to think? Wow, this is a conundrum. You know, I'm starting to think that maybe this isn't just an urban car. In fact, I think that is a pretty fair assumption.

Alright, I thought it through. From this point forward I'm just going to ignore people who think this is an "urban" only car. I just don't think they read the paperwork is all.

 

[I33t]

No-one is saying you can't drive the i3 on the freeway or in the mountains. When or if you do, you will not see the range or performance you get in urban areas. If you have a trip that is likely to challenge your car's range and you plan your trip with regards to maximizing range and performance you will likely be happy. If you don't then expect to have a less than happy experience.

The information is here to read and use.

 

[pvande]

All I want is that my i3 functions as engineered which is the European version. Because BMW could not convince the CARB boards ain't my problem. The evening news here in CA are all over every electric car crash. Wait for some 6 o'clock news report to show a regular i3 REX owners at 25 mph on a regular LA freeway and all hell breaks loose. Remember years ago the lady who claimed her Audi killed her daughter. It took Audi 15 years to come back to major US sales. When a Jury hears BMW curtailed the US i3 REX capabilities for financial gain while causing injury to consumers they will lose big time. And with it probably the i brand. Their position is indefensible. Corporate arrogance and greed over customer focused safe products. If anyone asks BMW why when the REX was engineered very differently from the way implemented BMW won't have any answers. Only that they got mode credits. Chevy and Cadillac will be shown to have not be so greedy and make a safe product.

 

[mindmachine]

All I want is that my i3 functions as engineered which is the European version. Because BMW could not convince the CARB boards ain't my problem. The evening news here in CA are all over every electric car crash. Wait for some 6 o'clock news report to show a regular i3 REX owners at 25 mph on a regular LA freeway and all hell breaks loose. Remember years ago the lady who claimed her Audi killed her daughter. It took Audi 15 years to come back to major US sales. When a Jury hears BMW curtailed the US i3 REX capabilities for financial gain while causing injury to consumers they will lose big time. And with it probably the i brand. Their position is indefensible. Corporate arrogance and greed over customer focused safe products. If anyone asks BMW why when the REX was engineered very differently from the way implemented BMW won't have any answers. Only that they got mode credits. Chevy and Cadillac will be shown to have not be so greedy and make a safe product.

Well said! I agree 110%

 

[jadnashuanh]

Even if you can turn the REx on early, as you can (you may not, forget, and easily run into a similar problem) elsewhere, if you continue to exceed the ability of the REx to keep up, you WILL run into exactly the same situation everywhere. What BMW did was to shift the responsibility on the user, but exactly the same end game can show up in Europe and elsewhere as in the USA. Does that make theirs dangerous?

You cannot continue to draw down the SOC and expect to keep up if you are going to drive long enough and hard enough under those adverse conditions and keep going.

The top speed on the i3 is well above any legal speeds posted in the USA, and it CAN do them, but like any car, EV or not, the faster you drive, the faster you run out of energy to keep going. The i3 REx does that somewhat more gracefully than running out of fuel on the side of the road - at least with the REx and a nearly dead battery, you can keep going as long as you have some fuel, even if it is in a degraded mode. On an ICE, run out of fuel, you're dead in the water.

I hope never to run into the 'can't move' situation on my BEV, but if I do, I won't blame BMW for it, just like I wouldn't if I ran my car out of gas...it's MY responsibility, not theirs, to keep it fueled so it works to my expectations (as long as they are based on reality, not wishful thinking!).