04-18-2014, 11:09 AM | #1 |
Unloved BMW Addict
86
Rep 1,185
Posts
Drives: Z3 Coupe, 3 318Ti
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: King County WA
|
i3- Risky
I need a new BMW within the next year or two. Currently, I am debating between this i3 and the diesel 3 series.
I wonder if buying the i3 is a risky proposition. New Tech. Electric... CF build. I am torn and wonder. I bought a first year 1 series and although it's a great car, it had it's share of problems. |
04-18-2014, 08:27 PM | #2 |
Major
51
Rep 1,061
Posts |
The i3 has been in development for awhile. In reality, it should be much more reliable than most new cars - an electric motor and batteries is pretty straight-forward.
It is a special use vehicle. The 3-series is a much less focused use car. Depends really on what you expect out of it, but my bet is that the i3 won't have major generic hiccups. They've designed the CFRP frame with breakaway seams that can be repaired and given field personnel training on how to fix one. You probably will not be able to get one repaired outside of the BMW network in the near-term unless it's just a scratched panel. |
Appreciate
0
|
05-27-2014, 06:33 PM | #4 |
New Member
0
Rep 5
Posts |
In theory, an EV should have less problems (less moving parts in an EV, no oil change, no gearbox etc.) as long as there os no defect with the battery.
On the other hand, many people choose the i3 REX version which adds a traditional engine. Are you going for the BEV or the REX version? The REX version looks a bit more complex but does away with range anxiety for some buyers... It will be interesting to see the order ratio from i3 pure BEV to Rex over time, here's a discussion with pros and cons on it: http://insideevs.com/bmw-i3-to-rex-or-not-to-rex/ PS: Thinking long-term, this BEV vs REX decision might also affect the resale value of the car. |
Appreciate
0
|
05-27-2014, 08:50 PM | #5 |
General
17447
Rep 18,814
Posts |
The internal combustion engine has been in existence for almost 140 years. It has been in series production for well over 100 years and comes in thousands of iterations and variations. It is seriously understood technology. Battery Electric vehicles have been in series production for maybe 10 years now. Hybrids 15 or so. Which do you think is the less-risk proposition?
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-28-2014, 11:03 AM | #6 |
New Member
0
Rep 5
Posts |
For me the risk isn't in the mode of locomotion. ICE versus Electric motor doesn't concern me so much.
I wouldn’t compare internal combustion engine to the whole electric car. Bad comparison in my mind. Rather the comparison should be apples to apples, meaning compare the ICE to Electric motor. Electric motors have been around and in development since 1740. Internal combustion engines have been around for nearly as long. But again, these technologies do not, for me, represent the greatest risk. For me it’s the battery. Specifically with battery life, longevity, safety and cost of replacement. After watching this video of the battery pack being built for the i3, it looks like they could be easily replaced when needed and if newer technology improves on the existing battery. Safety seems to have been addressed too but with the exception of under-tray impact resistance. I haven't found any information or videos demonstrating the battery packs ability to absorb impacts to the underside of the tray or prevent penetration by road debris. This was a problem with the Tesla and which lead Tesla to provide shielding for their battery packs. An other risk (for me) involves the financials of the vehicle. Will they hold their value as compared to other comparable vehicles? What will the used market be like for the i3? Because only the original buyer can claim the Tax Credit, used car purchasers may be challenged. How do used Nissan Leaf, Toyota Prius and Tesla S owners doing when selling their cars off? I haven’t really looked into it. |
Appreciate
0
|
05-31-2014, 06:26 AM | #7 | |
General
17447
Rep 18,814
Posts |
Quote:
The Volt comes closest to matching a monthly-cycle cost (car payment and fuel cost) for my commute and I've considered it, although the Volt's intended design use is not an 80 mile trip into the city from the rural country side. It's the concern of a battery replacement between 100,000 and 200,000 miles that keeps it out of serious contention. None of the EV/Hybrid manufacturers come clean on battery life, which tells you something... |
|
Appreciate
0
|
05-31-2014, 12:40 PM | #8 |
Major
51
Rep 1,061
Posts |
Modeling only goes so far with prediction of longevity. Real-life experience on some of the earliest electrics implies, given good temperature management and charging logic, they can last a long time. But, nobody really knows for sure. This is sort of like buying a pc...in 6-months or less, it will be obsolete, the new ones may be cheaper, faster, and generally more capable at the same or lower costs. You have to decide when to make the plunge.
FWIW, some places are planning on dropping the state fuel charge taxes in lieu of a miles traveled plan. The hassle is, newer cars get more mpg than the older ones, and end up doing more wear and damage to the roads without paying their 'full share' based on the gallons used...and, this is more true with an electric or hybrid that may not ever be buying gasoline, but still uses the roads, bridges, tunnels, etc. I think, in the long run, EVs will be hit up by the miles driven, cutting the benefit down somewhat verses an ICE. Still, from a maintenance standpoint, if you drive an EV as most are designed, you won't be producing any emissions in the densely populated areas that are the hardest to keep the air quality up, so they are a benefit. And, if you drive the thing as intended on mostly shorter trips, will save a lot of wear and tear on short trips that affect an ICE. |
Appreciate
0
|
06-05-2014, 05:45 AM | #9 |
General
17447
Rep 18,814
Posts |
I've got no idea how an EV can be compared to a PC. In relative speed of technology, development of EVs are at a glacial pace compared to the tech advance rate of PCs. What is known is that all chemical batteries have only so many chemical reactions in them, just as ICEs have only so many piston movements in them, which apparently if you only drive an ICE 6 feet a day it will succumb to a very early death.
|
Appreciate
0
|
06-05-2014, 02:45 PM | #10 |
Major
51
Rep 1,061
Posts |
There has been some reports of improvements to battery tech as much as 10x current stock in both the energy density and the ability to accept a fast charge primarily based on nanotechnology. Now, when it comes out of the labs and can be mass produced at an economical price point is the big question. Until then, we get small incremental improvements. Optimizing all of them should produce a significant upgrade, and potentially the inclusion of cost effective super capacitors, overcome some of the instant energy transfer limitations of battery technology and augment their abilities.
Try driving your ICE 1/2-mile to the store, sit there, and back, with most other trips only in the 1-3 mile range, and see how long it lasts and what your average fuel usage is. An electric car doesn't really care about short trips, and when you never stress the battery, a good means of that sort of transportation. Certainly, not everyone's use pattern would allow many of the available EVs out there, but for me, the i3 would qualify for over 90% of my day-to-day use and save the ICE where it shines, on long-distance travel. |
Appreciate
0
|
06-07-2014, 06:47 AM | #11 | |
General
17447
Rep 18,814
Posts |
Quote:
I know I rant all over this i3 Forum, but it's just because I hate this crap about being "Green". You make great points, EVs are excellent solutions for city environments and electric motors are ideal since they consume no energy at idle, which is the whole point when compared to ICEs. And yep, ICEs are much better suited for long-distance travel (my need). And just to let you know, I was an "early-adopter" of the 1st electric garden tractor (the GE Electrac) in the early 1970's, so I'm no stranger to the benefits of EVs. Battery technology will get better, but I'm not sure it will ever reach the energy density of carbon fuel. But if we're talking tech, then I think the R&D dollars could be better spent maximizing the efficiency of the internal combustion engine/vehicle drivetrain to get near the level of efficiency the electric drivetrain (i.e. little or no energy use at idle). It makes more sense to me, considering the level of energy density of carbon fuel. Unfortunately, the political incorrectness of burning carbon fuel will never allow for the volume of R&D dollars being spent to improve battery energy density to be shifted to improving the efficient use of carbon fuel in the automotive drivetrain. I think cars like the Volt are a better solution towards improving the efficiency of using carbon fuels. An automotive drivetrain that can consume carbon fuel at a 90 - 95% efficiency rate by converting the energy in the fuel to a storable form (like electricity in a storage battery) and then dispense that reformatted energy as dictated by the load of the mobility requirement is a better solution than carrying around a 500 pound battery that has the equivalent energy of 1 gallon of gasoline. Last edited by Efthreeoh; 06-07-2014 at 07:00 AM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
06-07-2014, 07:37 AM | #12 | |
Second Lieutenant
286
Rep 208
Posts
Drives: 23 BMW IX iDrive50, 23 Tesla X
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ohio, USA
|
Quote:
The volt is one of the poorer examples for your plan, it only gets around 38 mpg on gasoline while the Toyota Prius plug-in gets around 50 mpg. Also the volt is one of the less efficient EV's too. Not all of us live where public transportation in available nor can we carry the groceries we need by hand. However I am sure you would suggest we make multiple walking trips to the store. Anyhow not going to argue with you as I suspect it would be a waste of my time, sounds like you are set on these issues. However try reading up on these things before you spread more incorrect information. For example there is way more to EV efficiency then just the ICE not running at idle. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
06-07-2014, 10:39 AM | #13 | |
General
17447
Rep 18,814
Posts |
Quote:
And just brainstorming... Ceramic Engines that were in private development (i.e. not funded by the government) 30 years ago were getting upwards of 70% efficiency (if memory serves correctly). Had further development of ceramic engines (just as a engine type example) been made, the efficiency factor would even be better now, 30 years later. Take such an engine used in a hybrid system where the energy from carbon fuel is converted to electricity (with some loss) and then stored for use in the very efficient manner electricity is in an EV, the result would be a much higher efficient ICE vehicle than today, with no range limitation (the Volt is a rudimentary example of this design). EVs barely use any energy at idle (i.e. the vehicle is not moving); gasoline engines use fuel at idle and lose most of it as heat. A modern internal combustion engine is very efficient as compared to its ancestors, and the modern computer-controlled combustion process is very efficient but about 70% of the energy is lost as heat due to engine design. Ceramic engines improve that ratio (just as an example) because the ceramic material can deal with very high temperatures and convert more of the heat generated by the combustion process into usable work. Put a turbine engine running a hybrid system as discussed above and the possibilities are quite good. But as I said mobile burning of carbon fuel and the resultant exhaust emissions is now politically incorrect. Government has decided the Prius and Battery EV are the cars of the future; so what I am suggesting, to R&D the efficiency of the petrol engine, will never get public funding. In todays current electric generation industry, a majority (70% I think) of electricity is generated using carbon-base fuel, so the carbon produced to make EV travel is just transferred from the tailpipe to the smokestack, far away from the city, where most people live, so they don't care about the pollution they cannot see being generated. My Grandmother, who never had a drivers license and did not drive, had a fancy fold up grocery cart that she walked to the store with (she lived in Washington DC) bought her groceries and pulled or pushed them home. If my Grandmother could do it, I'm sure you could too! And by the way, if you drive a Volt 40 miles a day, it is more efficient than a Prius plug-in. The Prius Plug-in in most instances uses gasoline though out the drive cycle, and in pure electric mode (which it rarely runs in) only goes about 18 miles, vs. the Volts 37 (which is about the average daily driving distance of most Americans). Last edited by Efthreeoh; 06-07-2014 at 11:10 AM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
06-07-2014, 12:58 PM | #14 |
Major
51
Rep 1,061
Posts |
FWIW, if there were sidewalks and I didn't have to cross a 4-lane, busy highway and walk along it to get to the grocery store, I would walk! People have been killed along that highway walking...it's not safe. Our busses run about once every 1.5-hours...not particularly convenient if you're standing there with frozen food waiting to get home. So, everyone's situation is different, and for me, an electric car is a useful addition to the garage. Now, for the cost of an i3, I could pay for lots of cab rides, if I wanted to go that route, but I don't!
|
Appreciate
0
|
06-07-2014, 02:20 PM | #15 | |
Second Lieutenant
286
Rep 208
Posts
Drives: 23 BMW IX iDrive50, 23 Tesla X
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ohio, USA
|
Quote:
Many of your suppositions are incorrect, I am not wasting my time explaining it to you but you can read up on the internet. I am a retired engineer who used to work in internal combustion engine testing and design improvement. Wow how wrong you are. Dark ages wrong. Oh I forgot the Telas is one of the most inefficient cars on the planet EV wise. Last edited by mindmachine; 06-07-2014 at 02:34 PM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
06-07-2014, 03:03 PM | #16 | |
General
17447
Rep 18,814
Posts |
Quote:
LOL |
|
Appreciate
0
|
06-07-2014, 04:44 PM | #17 |
Unloved BMW Addict
86
Rep 1,185
Posts
Drives: Z3 Coupe, 3 318Ti
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: King County WA
|
Back on topic as the OP. Is there a lot of risk with the I3. See BrokenVert 'check engine' light is on post....
Thoughts! |
Appreciate
0
|
06-07-2014, 05:07 PM | #18 |
Major
51
Rep 1,061
Posts |
REx check engine issues aside, the only other thing I see commented on is with the ACC which seems sensitive to line markings, shadows, and curves, but you can turn that portion off and have it work as a 'normal' cruise control. SOme have reported that if you didn't close the rear doors well, the door open indication lights up. Not sure what kind of sensor they use, but it's likely just a slight adjustment, not a generic fault. BMW has put a lot of miles on their prototypes and there are a fair number of users from the start of sales in Europe before they came to the USA. That may be one reason why, with the last minute changes to the REx operation, why those in the USA are seeing the check engine indication where (to my knowledge) those in Europe are not.
WRT efficiency, one needs to consider that there's a considerable difference in actual watts delivered to the ground with an electric vehicle verses the raw energy of a gallon of gasoline where the conversion process to usable energy is still relatively poor compared to nearly 100% between the batteries and motive power. You need to compare apples to apples. |
Appreciate
0
|
06-07-2014, 05:17 PM | #19 | |
Second Lieutenant
286
Rep 208
Posts
Drives: 23 BMW IX iDrive50, 23 Tesla X
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ohio, USA
|
Quote:
So internal combustion engines are inherently inefficient if they get less miles per kwh than the electric motor used in EV's!!!! according to your number even.!!! You are making progress here. However I will give you a hint, the Toyota Prius plug-in is the most efficient EV on the planet. look at the numbers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
Appreciate
0
|
06-08-2014, 05:58 AM | #21 | |
General
17447
Rep 18,814
Posts |
Quote:
You had to go and take this to some stupid hybrid vs. ICE discussion I guess to defend your purchase of an i3 and a Lexus 450h. Still not sure why you can't comprehend the Tesla S battery has the equivalent stored energy of around 2.5 gallons of gasoline; it's been published as such. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
06-08-2014, 10:27 AM | #22 | |
Second Lieutenant
286
Rep 208
Posts
Drives: 23 BMW IX iDrive50, 23 Tesla X
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Ohio, USA
|
Quote:
What you apparently don't seem to get is that the internal combustion engine has been around a long time and continued R&D is not going to improve the efficiency to any significant extent. Don't you think that with the government mandated efficiency requirements as they currently exist; that the car companies are currently trying to squeeze out as many mpg as possible right now. I worked in this industry my job was in the R&D lab doing exactly what you suggest. Let me tell you, there is not much room for additional efficiency gains. Plus you still have the (pollution) emissions from the ICE. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|