[hotrod182]

Originally Posted by karguy95

If you've ever driven a Model 3 you'd know it feels like more than just a car but more like an extension of our phones. I was hoping when BMW/MB/Audi started rolling out with their full EV's they would take some ideas out of Tesla and how the car can still entertain you without moving. You know, the fun quirks and gimmicks. It doesn't look like this car will have that just basically an electric 340GC. For what's probably gonna be $75-$90k USD ill keep my Model 3. The Quality in Tesla will improve with time (plaid). So i'll continue waiting hopefully they get it soon. it was between a LCI G80 M3 and this for me so i'll wait for the LCI G80.

I just watched a reviewer say this i-drive screen system was the best in the industry. Another reviewer said this is the best driving EV out there. At likely $80K optioned out, and a long wait until next year to get one, I could easily take the cheap way out and get the Model 3 performance, but no way. Just having a car that is not Camry common is worth it to me. Besides, it looks like the i4 will walk the Model 3p at highway speeds 60-120, which I am more likely to encounter than a drag strip launch from a stand still.

[techwhiz1]

Originally Posted by DocWeatherington

Sorry, you don't understand what I what I was trying to convey. All major manufacturers produce cars on a production cycle of 5-7yrs..Aka this car was designed year's ago with current tech at that moment as its based upon the 4 series which is based upon the 3 series which came out in 2018 and is approaching halfway thru it's lifecycle.

In 2025 BMW has the Neue Klasse coming. Thus, all these upcoming EVs, IX, I4, even the I7 perhaps are like stopgaps. An like an cellphone will be outdated within a year.

I would say, yes the chassis was designed then, but the motor tech is new and is on par with newer Tesla motor tech. No permanent magnets and rare earth materials. DSC built into the motor.

The ADAS system isn't 5 years old.

You can make the same argument for the TM3. They dumped modern adaptive suspension and steering due to cost.

[Needsdecaf]

Originally Posted by 4monks

... well not quite... it's extrapolating the two facts that he covered 185 km and consumed 63% of charge, so not totally unreasonable. The real variables are the roads and how he's driven it over those 185kms.

He did a bunch of launches, Autobahn runs, etc. The run was one way with a partial battery. That's not how you do a range test. Not a great way to determine real world ranges.

[yousefnjr]

Originally Posted by hotrod182

I think they intentionally made the throttle mapping ramp up a little sluggish. Perhaps to protect from excessive driveline shock. Either way, the jump the Model 3 performance has off the start, makes it nearly impossible to catch the Tesla in a qtr mile drag race. But a roll on race from higher freeway speeds may reverse the results.

I remember reading something along these lines in the past but can’t recall exactly where. Something like during testing of the Active E 1 series they were breaking shafts and addressed it by gradually feeding in the power instead. Im sure you’ll agree you can definitely feel that in the i3 as well.

As predicted they won’t allow this car to be faster than the M3/4 anyway so I suppose it doesn’t matter, but still irks me nonetheless

[bimmer456]

Not very fun because it has to be significantly faster than regular Ms to compensate for no noise like a Tesla not just matching or coming close to the performance.

[cfm56d7b]

Of all the BMW electric vehicles, only i4 M50 is under consideration. But only after a test drive and measure-7-times-cut-once thinking thereafter.

CarWow video is entertaining as always.

[stylinexpat]

Once they get closer to 500 mile range they can be considered. These are like when smartphones first came out with 1 day battery life. Under 300 miles is bad especially if you want to keep it between 20-80% capacity. Then figure you get about 80% after a year or two of what they tell you that you get and you have very poor range unless you just drive it in the city for small errands

[supershaft]

Originally Posted by karguy95

If you've ever driven a Model 3 you'd know it feels like more than just a car but more like an extension of our phones. I was hoping when BMW/MB/Audi started rolling out with their full EV's they would take some ideas out of Tesla and how the car can still entertain you without moving. You know, the fun quirks and gimmicks. It doesn't look like this car will have that just basically an electric 340GC. For what's probably gonna be $75-$90k USD ill keep my Model 3. The Quality in Tesla will improve with time (plaid). So i'll continue waiting hopefully they get it soon. it was between a LCI G80 M3 and this for me so i'll wait for the LCI G80.

tesla's interior quality is that of a 90's toyota. their panel gaps are horrendous, reparability also horrendous, and that's just what we know about because tesla isn't exactly a forthcoming entity when it comes to safety. my neighbor said there's a reason why he leaves the tesla to charge outside and not in the garage.

tesla's jig is gonna be up when the traditional automakers start making compelling EVs and this BMW is a good start.

[techwhiz1]

Originally Posted by supershaft

tesla's interior quality is that of a 90's toyota. their panel gaps are horrendous, reparability also horrendous, and that's just what we know about because tesla isn't exactly a forthcoming entity when it comes to safety. my neighbor said there's a reason why he leaves the tesla to charge outside and not in the garage.

tesla's jig is gonna be up when the traditional automakers start making compelling EVs and this BMW is a good start.

Factor in that Tesla would not exist for all the tax breaks my home state gave it. The ability to sell emissions credits and the like.

Now moving headquarters to Texas.

So besides the crappy quality I'd never buy one because they are moving headquarters to Texas.

But back to the interior. I would never buy a car that requires me to look away from the road to get basic information. You must look to the center and it has no HUD. You can't glance at a guage cluster because it doesn't have one.

For all those touting the glory of the TM3, please go buy one. You probably aren't a BMW buyer anyway.

[bmwdrive]

Originally Posted by hotrod182

I just watched a reviewer say this i-drive screen system was the best in the industry. Another reviewer said this is the best driving EV out there. At likely $80K optioned out, and a long wait until next year to get one, I could easily take the cheap way out and get the Model 3 performance, but no way. Just having a car that is not Camry common is worth it to me. Besides, it looks like the i4 will walk the Model 3p at highway speeds 60-120, which I am more likely to encounter than a drag strip launch from a stand still.

What is most impressive to me is how quiet they say the i4 is at highway speeds. This is what you would expect from an EV but it's not the case at all with a Tesla that gets tons of road noise in the cabin. I have no idea if the i4 will walk the M3P 60-120. But it seems like the i4 will be a nicer place to be at those speeds regardless. And it's not like the M3P is cheap. I would also wait for the i4 if I were you.

[bmwdrive]

Originally Posted by karguy95

If you've ever driven a Model 3 you'd know it feels like more than just a car but more like an extension of our phones. I was hoping when BMW/MB/Audi started rolling out with their full EV's they would take some ideas out of Tesla and how the car can still entertain you without moving. You know, the fun quirks and gimmicks. It doesn't look like this car will have that just basically an electric 340GC. For what's probably gonna be $75-$90k USD ill keep my Model 3. The Quality in Tesla will improve with time (plaid). So i'll continue waiting hopefully they get it soon. it was between a LCI G80 M3 and this for me so i'll wait for the LCI G80.

Everyone values different things. But to me, a car that feels like an extension of my phone and has a bunch of gimmicks is not more than a car. It is less of a car and more like a computer on wheels.

Good choice on the G80.

[thaalrasha]

Originally Posted by 4monks

... well not quite... it's extrapolating the two facts that he covered 185 km and consumed 63% of charge, so not totally unreasonable. The real variables are the roads and how he's driven it over those 185kms.

Having to worry how i'm driving because of range / charge challenges is a deal breaker for me. I want to drive the way i want on the piece of road that i'm on. I don't want the appliance to decide that for me or having to make a detour and waste time to charge it to make it where i need to go. Battery tech is just not there yet and charging is too long.

[4monks]

Originally Posted by Needsdecaf

He did a bunch of launches, Autobahn runs, etc. The run was one way with a partial battery. That's not how you do a range test. Not a great way to determine real world ranges.

Clearly, and like I said, the real variables are how he drove it and the roads. The "partial battery" was 99% charged at the start, so not really partial.

[Needsdecaf]

Originally Posted by stylinexpat

Once they get closer to 500 mile range they can be considered. These are like when smartphones first came out with 1 day battery life. Under 300 miles is bad especially if you want to keep it between 20-80% capacity. Then figure you get about 80% after a year or two of what they tell you that you get and you have very poor range unless you just drive it in the city for small errands

I drive (well up until 3 months ago anyway) 35k miles a year in an EV with a rated range close to 300 but in reality it was more like 220. I took it on several 500 mile road trips.

That range was NEVER an issue.

Your figures are way overblown and your degredation figures are way pessimistic.

[Needsdecaf]

Originally Posted by techwhiz1

For all those touting the glory of the TM3, please go buy one. You probably aren't a BMW buyer anyway.

Oh please give that trope a break. Open your mind and appreciate what some things are good at, eh? I've owned two model 3's, which is one more than the number of BMW's I've owned. My F10 535 was an absolutely terrible driving car. You can search my history on here if you don't believe it.

I've driven my two now over 70k miles and have to say the whole "you have to take your eyes off the road" thing is totally, totally overblown. First of all, checking your speed by looking to the center screen is just as easy as glancing down. Second of all, almost everything is auto, and the screen logic is so easily laid out that it's a dawdle to operate. Third, I own a 958 generation Cayenne, which has buttons for freaking EVERYTHING. Let me tell you, you have to look down to operate those too, because there's a button for everything!

People make too much hype out of the screen controlling most things because it's foreign to them and they haven't lived with it.

Having said that, I believe that the i4, or really the iX, has the right amount of buttons. The Tesla has some controls that really would be better as direct buttons. Like the wipers, for one.

[SteveinArizona]

Originally Posted by 4monks

BMW quote 315 miles, for i4 M50 with the 19" wheels and 265 miles for the 20" wheels.that he was driving.

All the testing is done assuming that the vehicles are driven like Buicks. But who buys a BMW to drive it like a Buick? So I assume that any BEV I buy would have much lower range than officially asserted.

For this reason I like reviews where the cars are actually driven at speed on roads.

[supershaft]

Originally Posted by Needsdecaf

Oh please give that trope a break. Open your mind and appreciate what some things are good at, eh? I've owned two model 3's, which is one more than the number of BMW's I've owned. My F10 535 was an absolutely terrible driving car. You can search my history on here if you don't believe it.

I've driven my two now over 70k miles and have to say the whole "you have to take your eyes off the road" thing is totally, totally overblown. First of all, checking your speed by looking to the center screen is just as easy as glancing down. Second of all, almost everything is auto, and the screen logic is so easily laid out that it's a dawdle to operate. Third, I own a 958 generation Cayenne, which has buttons for freaking EVERYTHING. Let me tell you, you have to look down to operate those too, because there's a button for everything!

People make too much hype out of the screen controlling most things because it's foreign to them and they haven't lived with it.

Having said that, I believe that the i4, or really the iX, has the right amount of buttons. The Tesla has some controls that really would be better as direct buttons. Like the wipers, for one.

because you can't replace buttons and eventually you have a familiarization with said buttons so you don't have to take your eyes off the road for more than a second. with a screen you have to look at what you are pressing and continue looking until the function is pressed. there's a reason why airplanes aren't just all touchscreens and still have buttons. your logic makes no sense at all.

tesla using a yoke for their car kind of seals the deal as a joke.

[4monks]

Originally Posted by SteveinArizona

All the testing is done assuming that the vehicles are driven like Buicks. But who buys a BMW to drive it like a Buick? So I assume that any BEV I buy would have much lower range than officially asserted.

For this reason I like reviews where the cars are actually driven at speed on roads.

Same. Good to know both the spectrum of range you can expect.

[stein_325i]

I honestly wish the EPA would make their range testing more accurate as well as offer both a city and hwy range similar to ICE vehicles, because I have no idea what the hell MPGe means and how to interpret it.

[edycol]

Originally Posted by karguy95

If you've ever driven a Model 3 you'd know it feels like more than just a car but more like an extension of our phones. I was hoping when BMW/MB/Audi started rolling out with their full EV's they would take some ideas out of Tesla and how the car can still entertain you without moving. You know, the fun quirks and gimmicks. It doesn't look like this car will have that just basically an electric 340GC. For what's probably gonna be $75-$90k USD ill keep my Model 3. The Quality in Tesla will improve with time (plaid). So i'll continue waiting hopefully they get it soon. it was between a LCI G80 M3 and this for me so i'll wait for the LCI G80.

There is a life beyond the phone!

[Needsdecaf]

Originally Posted by supershaft

because you can't replace buttons and eventually you have a familiarization with said buttons so you don't have to take your eyes off the road for more than a second. with a screen you have to look at what you are pressing and continue looking until the function is pressed. there's a reason why airplanes aren't just all touchscreens and still have buttons. your logic makes no sense at all.
.

I own a car operated solely with a touchscreen. I've driven it personally over 70,000 miles.

I also own a car with some of the most heavily button laden interiors ever produced (and once previously owned one with even more buttons, the Acura MDX). The Acura and my current Cayenne I've personally driven each of those in excess of 75,000 miles. There is a balance between the two. I will tell you that although your statement is, on the surface, logical (i.e. you need to take eyes off the road to operate a screen), both the placement of said screen and the amount of times you actually need to look at the screen represent no more significant eyes down time as an interior filled with many small buttons. Which ALSO require eyes off the road as they cannot simply be used by muscle memory. Because if you think that this is easy to memorize and operate at speed, I'm telling you, you're wrong.




So go ahead and believe what you want. I've got the seat time behind both and mine isn't an opinion, it's an actual experience.

Agree Tesla's yoke is a joke but that's a whataboutism argument and has no bearing on touchscreens being useful.

[Needsdecaf]

Originally Posted by SteveinArizona

All the testing is done assuming that the vehicles are driven like Buicks. But who buys a BMW to drive it like a Buick? So I assume that any BEV I buy would have much lower range than officially asserted.

For this reason I like reviews where the cars are actually driven at speed on roads.

The EPA range testing is actually done using the exact same City and Highway testing procedures as ICE vehicles. You can then either do a 5 cycle test and report those results, as Tesla does, or fewer tests and discount your range by 30% to account for environmental variables. I've looked all this up and studied it extensively to understand why the Taycan can trounce the EPA range while Tesla can never reach it.

Originally Posted by stein_325i

I honestly wish the EPA would make their range testing more accurate as well as offer both a city and hwy range similar to ICE vehicles, because I have no idea what the hell MPGe means and how to interpret it.

Separate highway and city ranges would be useful. MPGe is really only useful to compare how one car relates to another, and is only really useful if you're worried about charging costs (and time to a certain extent).

Consider MPG is a consumption rate. It has nothing to do with overall range. Range of an ICE vehicle is calculated by multiplying your consumption (Miles / Gallon) by available fuel capacity (gallons) to get miles of range. So if you do 20MPG city, 30 MPG highway and have a 20 MPG tank, your range is 400 to 600 miles.

(assuming you do the actual MPG and assuming all 20 gallons are usable but that's another story).

Range on an EV is kind of backwards thinking compared to ICE, because just like you can increase range on an ICE by either decreasing consumption or increasing tank size, on an EV you can get more range with a bigger battery or lower consumption (Wh/ Mile). So while a Tesla Model 3 might have similar range to a Mustang MachE, the Tesla has a 72 kWh battery while the Mustang has a 92 kWh one. kWh is a measure of energy storage in that you can sustain a power delivery of 72 kW for one hour, or 1 kW for 72 hours, or anywhere in between. The Mustang has a bigger battery, or larger energy storage, and that's how it gets better range.

MPGe corrects for the battery size, and tells you how efficient (relating to more or less consumption, lower or higher Wh/mile) your EV is.

The e in MPG is a conversion used as 1 gallon of gas contains the same amount of energy as 33.4 kWH of electricity. So a Tesla Model 3 has barely over 2 gallons worth of gas on board, essentially. While a Mustang MachE has just under 3. It's a goofy conversion meant to try to give people something 'relatable'. What would be far more accurate, but ultimately harder to understand, would be to tell people what kind of consumption an EV has at City and Highway speeds. Consumption in the us being kWh / mile, or Wh/100 miles. But then people would ask "well how far does that mean I can go" and so the EPA doesn't use that info.

I know this wasn't well written, but I hope it does shed some light.