[[DT]]

Originally Posted by thebishman

We have posters here who today can’t/won’t take their iX on certain journeys because the risk of being stuck at an L2 charger for hours is too high to accept. A REx option would be perfect for them.

As well as people who have not opted to get an EV because of the same concerns, whether this is distance, location, use case - ex: towing. Scout is seeing about 75% of reservations being the EREV flavor (granted,, some of that is the nature of how that vehicle will be used).

[thebishman]

Originally Posted by NomoTesla

This is hardly a significant share of the EV population. These are edge cases that do not justify.


Don't underestimate the stupidity of the average American. Also, what will keep them from gassing up while on a trip instead of stopping at a DCFC? I guarantee you, most people who would buy such an abomination will run it like a gas car. People are dumb.


Those are penis-mobiles that are bought to satisfy ego and compensate for a size issue below the waist. Those buys are not about range anxiety in the slightest.

We also have monumentally efficient vehicles like Lucid and Tesla that get 3-4 mi/kWh or higher. Gasoline has no place in an EV. Period. Anybody who wants that should just buy a gas car and be happy. I am not a fan of a half-assed, all-of-the-above chickenshit strategy. That's the attitude that prevented companies like BMW from going all-in on EVs for decades. It took an all-in strategy by Tesla to push everyone else out of their complacency.

Oliver Zipse is a chickenshit coward who can't commit to the future. BMW's vision of the future is one of compromise and fear. Their future model line reflects this.

I’m sure you are a good person who means well, but my God I find your thoughts on your fellow ‘man’ to be incredibly depressing.

I’m just so glad that BMW has chosen a differing path forward, and I believe that the existence of REx’s could well drive us towards a greater % of pure EVs on the road much quicker.

[EV Fan]

Originally Posted by thebishman

Everything we’ve ever read about the ‘26 iX5 is that it is based on the CLAR architecture. The Autocar article initially mentions that the iX5 will be based on CLAR, but then when talking about how the iX5 will use elements from the NK EVs, such as the motors; batteries, etc.

This was also my interpretation; the iX5 will be CLAR-based but will adopt certain NK elements.

I agree with everything else in your post. Personally, I only have an iX because it's a full BEV, thus limiting my exposure to BMW's maintenance needs and the high cost associated. I doubt I'd get one with the additional complexity of a hybrid.

[EV Fan]

Originally Posted by thebishman

I’m sure you are a good person who means well, but my God I find your thoughts on your fellow ‘man’ to be incredibly depressing.

Depressing, yes, but remember the smart person who said something to the effect of, "Nobody ever went broke by underestimating the intelligence of the average American."

Personally I see anything that gets a battery into more peoples' vehicles to be a transitional step toward a BEV.

[LVBMW]

Originally Posted by NomoTesla

This is hardly a significant share of the EV population. These are edge cases that do not justify.


Don't underestimate the stupidity of the average American. Also, what will keep them from gassing up while on a trip instead of stopping at a DCFC? I guarantee you, most people who would buy such an abomination will run it like a gas car. People are dumb.


Those are penis-mobiles that are bought to satisfy ego and compensate for a size issue below the waist. Those buys are not about range anxiety in the slightest.

We also have monumentally efficient vehicles like Lucid and Tesla that get 3-4 mi/kWh or higher. Gasoline has no place in an EV. Period. Anybody who wants that should just buy a gas car and be happy. I am not a fan of a half-assed, all-of-the-above chickenshit strategy. That's the attitude that prevented companies like BMW from going all-in on EVs for decades. It took an all-in strategy by Tesla to push everyone else out of their complacency.

Oliver Zipse is a chickenshit coward who can't commit to the future. BMW's vision of the future is one of compromise and fear. Their future model line reflects this.

I can’t get over the disdain you seem to hold toward your fellow human beings. This post is just dripping with self-superiority, judgment, assumptions and a general smug disdain for humankind. I wish we all could be as wonderful and enlightened as you.

[exxxviii]

Originally Posted by EV Fan

This was also my interpretation; the iX5 will be CLAR-based but will adopt certain NK elements.

See my quick discovery above… the iX is on the CLAR platform. Everything is on the CLAR platform. Methinks we do not know what “CLAR” means.

[thebishman]

Originally Posted by exxxviii

See my quick discovery above… the iX is on the CLAR platform. Everything is on the CLAR platform. Methinks we do not know what “CLAR” means.

Frankly I’d be extremely surprised that BMW’s engineers haven’t been able to design a different floor pan for the iX5 compared to the gas/hybrid versions.

[NomoTesla]

Originally Posted by thebishman

I’m sure you are a good person who means well...

A sentence that starts out this way never ends well for the recipient!

Originally Posted by thebishman

I’m just so glad that BMW has chosen a differing path forward, and I believe that the existence of REx’s could well drive us towards a greater % of pure EVs on the road much quicker.

My disagreement with this is, compromised platforms do nothing to put BEVs into people's hands because they are almost always a disappointment on the BEV side.

It's the complete and total abandoment of legacy thought that has brought Tesla to the industry leadership position it currently holds. I'm no longer a fan of their leader, and their cars are certainly not the highest quality on the road, but Tesla has done more to move the world toward BEV than anyone. And they didn't do it with a REX, or hybrid, or anything of the sort.

It's this sort of commitment that brought us greater range, a radical re-thinking of battery packaging, and the Supercharger network. None of this would have existed if Tesla wanted to appease the "majority". No vehicle manufacturers until Ionna self-funded any charging expansion that I'm aware (outside of Tesla). And even then, Ionna is a joint venture between many. Nobody in the ICE world is willing to take any risks, it seems.

Originally Posted by EV Fan

I agree with everything else in your post. Personally, I only have an iX because it's a full BEV, thus limiting my exposure to BMW's maintenance needs and the high cost associated. I doubt I'd get one with the additional complexity of a hybrid.

The iX has been (knock wood) extremely reliable for us. One free maintenance visit in 2 years and a brake fluid flush that didn't even need to be done (before everyone chimes in on the necessity of brake fluid flushes, I live in the desert with 5% humidity). That's it!

Originally Posted by EV Fan

Depressing, yes, but remember the smart person who said something to the effect of, "Nobody ever went broke by underestimating the intelligence of the average American."

Personally I see anything that gets a battery into more peoples' vehicles to be a transitional step toward a BEV.

Sadly, I believe a REX will prevent the manufacturer from improving battery range, which is expensive. Human nature prevails here, which is to not do anything if the status quo is acceptable. The fact that it took BMW this long to bring an i3 successor to market—pushed to do so almost entirely by Tesla—is proof that they have almost zero will to do BEV unless their market share is under threat.

Originally Posted by LVBMW

I can’t get over the disdain you seem to hold toward your fellow human beings. This post is just dripping with self-superiority, judgment, assumptions and a general smug disdain for humankind.

Thank you, that's actually a compliment. My cynicism allows me to see things much more clearly than most. Look how far ahead Europe is in EV adoption, charging infrastructure, conservation, and commitment to democratic norms. They're all-in. Their people are educated. Their relative income levels are far higher than the average American, who can barely think his/her/their way out of a McDonald's bag.

The fact that in the entire history of automotive, there have been zero BEVs with a practical range before Tesla, is prima facie evidence of the industry's inability to do anything that doesn't maintain the comfortable status quo. BMW didn't make the iX because it wanted to. It made it because it thought it HAD to. That, in itself, is a bit of a problem. If we did not have Tesla as an industry forcing function, there would be no iX, no i4, no i5, no i-anything.

I mean, look no further than all of the magical progress BMW has made with the X5 Hybrid. The latest version boasts a whopping 68 miles of battery electric range. WOW! Isn't that amazing? Want more range? No problem. Just dump in some gas… Let's say BMW makes a BEV w/ REX that provides a range of 500-600 miles. What on earth would be BMW's incentive to increase the electric range and to eventually phase out the REX?

I'm an EV purist. If it runs on gas, it's not an EV. Period. End of story. And anything that isn't a pure EV from the get-go isn't going to magically evolve into an EV if the manufacturer doesn't have an incentive to do so. Most, if not all, EV owners that I know personally would never, ever, in a million years, set foot in a gas station unless it's to get a Coke. To do so would be antithetical to the entire point of driving EV. Those are the people who made Tesla into the behemoth it is, which forced BMW to make an EV with a practical, real-world range.

[EV Fan]

Originally Posted by NomoTesla

The fact that it took BMW this long to bring an i3 successor to market—pushed to do so almost entirely by Tesla—is proof that they have almost zero will to do BEV unless their market share is under threat.

Welcome to capitalism. Very few companies exhibit "will" (maybe some like Patagonia), most respond to market forces as they see them. OEMs didn't flock to EVs because they want to save the Earth, they responded to increasingly strict environmental regulations and to the customer base who wants to save the Earth, or simply drive a quiet, comfortable, efficient vehicle and were open to new technology (well, a century old but new in their lifetime).

Today most of those people already have EVs. To increase sales they need to expand that market while they also exert their political influence to ease regulations and relax mandates, e.g., by redefining 'electrified' as electric. As a practical matter, hybrids and EVs will co-exist for many years, especially in the US where freedom to choose is prized. Sorry it doesn't meet your ideals, but it's the reality.

[exxxviii]

Originally Posted by thebishman

Frankly I’d be extremely surprised that BMW’s engineers haven’t been able to design a different floor pan for the iX5 compared to the gas/hybrid versions.

This is my hope as well. The whole idea is that this is a modular architecture they use between all different car types. There is no reason they could not leverage the modularity to optimize the same car for all engine types.

[LVBMW]

Originally Posted by NomoTesla

A sentence that starts out this way never ends well for the recipient!


My disagreement with this is, compromised platforms do nothing to put BEVs into people's hands because they are almost always a disappointment on the BEV side.

It's the complete and total abandoment of legacy thought that has brought Tesla to the industry leadership position it currently holds. I'm no longer a fan of their leader, and their cars are certainly not the highest quality on the road, but Tesla has done more to move the world toward BEV than anyone. And they didn't do it with a REX, or hybrid, or anything of the sort.

It's this sort of commitment that brought us greater range, a radical re-thinking of battery packaging, and the Supercharger network. None of this would have existed if Tesla wanted to appease the "majority". No vehicle manufacturers until Ionna self-funded any charging expansion that I'm aware (outside of Tesla). And even then, Ionna is a joint venture between many. Nobody in the ICE world is willing to take any risks, it seems.


The iX has been (knock wood) extremely reliable for us. One free maintenance visit in 2 years and a brake fluid flush that didn't even need to be done (before everyone chimes in on the necessity of brake fluid flushes, I live in the desert with 5% humidity). That's it!


Sadly, I believe a REX will prevent the manufacturer from improving battery range, which is expensive. Human nature prevails here, which is to not do anything if the status quo is acceptable. The fact that it took BMW this long to bring an i3 successor to market—pushed to do so almost entirely by Tesla—is proof that they have almost zero will to do BEV unless their market share is under threat.



Thank you, that's actually a compliment. My cynicism allows me to see things much more clearly than most. Look how far ahead Europe is in EV adoption, charging infrastructure, conservation, and commitment to democratic norms. They're all-in. Their people are educated. Their relative income levels are far higher than the average American, who can barely think his/her/their way out of a McDonald's bag.

The fact that in the entire history of automotive, there have been zero BEVs with a practical range before Tesla, is prima facie evidence of the industry's inability to do anything that doesn't maintain the comfortable status quo. BMW didn't make the iX because it wanted to. It made it because it thought it HAD to. That, in itself, is a bit of a problem. If we did not have Tesla as an industry forcing function, there would be no iX, no i4, no i5, no i-anything.

I mean, look no further than all of the magical progress BMW has made with the X5 Hybrid. The latest version boasts a whopping 68 miles of battery electric range. WOW! Isn't that amazing? Want more range? No problem. Just dump in some gas… Let's say BMW makes a BEV w/ REX that provides a range of 500-600 miles. What on earth would be BMW's incentive to increase the electric range and to eventually phase out the REX?

I'm an EV purist. If it runs on gas, it's not an EV. Period. End of story. And anything that isn't a pure EV from the get-go isn't going to magically evolve into an EV if the manufacturer doesn't have an incentive to do so. Most, if not all, EV owners that I know personally would never, ever, in a million years, set foot in a gas station unless it's to get a Coke. To do so would be antithetical to the entire point of driving EV. Those are the people who made Tesla into the behemoth it is, which forced BMW to make an EV with a practical, real-world range.

See much more clearly than most… There’s that smug superiority again! Ah if only we could reach your level of enlightenment. I guess we’re all too busy trying to find our ways out of those McDonalds bags.

[LVBMW]

Originally Posted by EV Fan

Welcome to capitalism. Very few companies exhibit "will" (maybe some like Patagonia), most respond to market forces as they see them. OEMs didn't flock to EVs because they want to save the Earth, they responded to increasingly strict environmental regulations and to the customer base who wants to save the Earth, or simply drive a quiet, comfortable, efficient vehicle and were open to new technology (well, a century old but new in their lifetime).

Today most of those people already have EVs. To increase sales they need to expand that market while they also exert their political influence to ease regulations and relax mandates, e.g., by redefining 'electrified' as electric. As a practical matter, hybrids and EVs will co-exist for many years, especially in the US where freedom to choose is prized. Sorry it doesn't meet your ideals, but it's the reality.

Extremely well said!!

[exxxviii]

Originally Posted by thebishman

I’m sure you are a good person who means well

Originally Posted by NomoTesla

A sentence that starts out this way never ends well for the recipient!

Bless your heart.

[EV Fan]

Originally Posted by exxxviii

This is my hope as well. The whole idea is that this is a modular architecture they use between all different car types. There is no reason they could not leverage the modularity to optimize the same car for all engine types.

As long as we're dealing in hopes, my hope is that with years to design platforms for multiple propulsion types, the compromises of that shared use will be minimal and pretty much invisible to the driver...as opposed to the current examples where OEMs rushed an EV to market using an existing ICE platform, with all the compromises that entailed.

[thebishman]

I believe Nomotesla has it wrong when stating that a REx it isn’t a true BEV. It of course is, in that its source of propulsion are solely its electric motors which obviously are ‘fueled’ by electrons; it’s just that there are two sources that supply the electrons: a decent size battery, with I’d wager at least a 200-300 mile range, and then a gas fueled ‘generator’ that supplies nothing but electrons to the battery and/or the electric motors directly. In no way does the generator supply tractive force to the drivetrain. Like previous REx’s, the fuel tank for the REx i5 would probably be relatively small; hence driver’s would run for 2/3rds of the total range on the battery, and could if they so choose an additional 1/3rd of total range by utilizing the ‘range extender’ generator function.
Buying a REx as their first EV will quickly convince the majority of the population that they don’t in fact need a REx for their next vehicle, as the infrastructure is actual fine on the relatively rare occasions they drive long distances; of course assuming they have overnight charging when necessary easily available.

The ‘Holy Grail’ of course remains the Solid State Lithium battery. Once they come online in large numbers the whole paradigm shifts.

[exxxviii]

Originally Posted by thebishman

I believe Nomotesla has it wrong when stating that a REx it isn’t a true BEV.

A Battery Electric is a specific category that only has a battery for energy storage. A REx is a different category called called EREV, REEV, or BEVx depending on the configuration.

I think alternative configurations that center around electric motors helps ease people into the world of electrics.

[Maverick241]

Originally Posted by NomoTesla

^^ This article says iX5 will be CLAR-based.



^^ And this article says the iX5 is NK-based.

The concept of a REx is stupid and will slow EV infrastructure expansion. A REx complicates manufacture, complicates service, and complicates the ownership experience. Most will just run on the REx exclusively and not stop to charge. REx will also come at the expense of battery size and EV range.

Stupid. Stupid. Stupid. BMW is acting like a scared cat that doesn't know which way to go. It wants to do everything and nothing all at the same time. The reason the iX is such a hit is because it's fresh and new and exciting. I can't say that for any of the CLAR-based models. They look boring, outmoded, and last century.

The iX5 in the US is 100% CLAR this is long confirmed. The only NK models announced are i3 and iX3. That second article says there will be NK elements like idrive X in the new CLAR models.

[Maverick241]

Originally Posted by LVBMW

I can’t get over the disdain you seem to hold toward your fellow human beings. This post is just dripping with self-superiority, judgment, assumptions and a general smug disdain for humankind. I wish we all could be as wonderful and enlightened as you.

[Maverick241]

Originally Posted by KRS_SN

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/n...evival-2026-x5

REX

Bet you a million bucks they won’t sell this in the US

[ggalanis]

Originally Posted by NomoTesla

I'm an EV purist. If it runs on gas, it's not an EV. Period. End of story. And anything that isn't a pure EV from the get-go isn't going to magically evolve into an EV if the manufacturer doesn't have an incentive to do so. Most, if not all, EV owners that I know personally would never, ever, in a million years, set foot in a gas station unless it's to get a Coke. To do so would be antithetical to the entire point of driving EV. Those are the people who made Tesla into the behemoth it is, which forced BMW to make an EV with a practical, real-world range.

I assume that the major issue you have with any non pure BEV is that they need to burn some fossil fuels and that the reason you are so passionately pro BEV and anti everything else is that the outcome you desire is to lower how much fossil fuels are used as much as possible.

If everyone got a BEV when purchasing a new/used vehicle, it would lower emissions more than going any other route, that's for sure. However that doesn't take into consideration things like cost, capacity to produce battery packs, people's behavior, etc.

I don't think we have the resources to make every new vehicle a full BEV. A full BEV is much more expensive than any alternative version of a vehicle and is a very high barrier to entry for many people. Many people worry about range and are not mentally ready to go full BEV. Last, the current charging infrastructure cannot handle everyone switching to BEV vehicles in the next couple of years.

Long story short, given the actual constraints that exist, fuel efficient cars, hybrids, plug in hybrids and range extender EVs can help reduce emissions MORE than if those options were not available.

A personal example is a friend of mine that bought a Rav4 prime relatively recently. When I talked to him, it was clear to me that he was a prime candidate to get a BEV. I tried to convince him, but failed to do so. One of his arguments was that he wanted to do Montreal-Florida drives yearly and could not accept the extra time it would take with an EV with the extra up front cost, plus the perceived stress about range anxiety. I said just rent a car for that trip but that wasn't acceptable to him; if the BEV was a lot cheaper, maybe he could have accepted this alternative.

So he ended up with the Rav4 prime. If he had not gotten that, he would not have had an EV. He would have gotten the equivalent of a non-hybrid Rav4; a regular gas car.

The result of him having his plug in hybrid with max 80km of summer range is that he essentially drives it like an EV 95% of the time. He constantly recharges it to use as little gas as possible. The availability of the platform made him lower his emissions by a decent amount whereas if he only could chose between gas or BEV, he would have chosen gas. Is it a compromise, yes. But it is still the solution that reduced his emissions by the most possible for now, given the constraints he had.

[chanders]

Originally Posted by ggalanis

I assume that the major issue you have with any non pure BEV is that they need to burn some fossil fuels and that the reason you are so passionately pro BEV and anti everything else is that the outcome you desire is to lower how much fossil fuels are used as much as possible.

If everyone got a BEV when purchasing a new/used vehicle, it would lower emissions more than going any other route, that's for sure. However that doesn't take into consideration things like cost, capacity to produce battery packs, people's behavior, etc.

I don't think we have the resources to make every new vehicle a full BEV. A full BEV is much more expensive than any alternative version of a vehicle and is a very high barrier to entry for many people. Many people worry about range and are not mentally ready to go full BEV. Last, the current charging infrastructure cannot handle everyone switching to BEV vehicles in the next couple of years.

Long story short, given the actual constraints that exist, fuel efficient cars, hybrids, plug in hybrids and range extender EVs can help reduce emissions MORE than if those options were not available.

A personal example is a friend of mine that bought a Rav4 prime relatively recently. When I talked to him, it was clear to me that he was a prime candidate to get a BEV. I tried to convince him, but failed to do so. One of his arguments was that he wanted to do Montreal-Florida drives yearly and could not accept the extra time it would take with an EV with the extra up front cost, plus the perceived stress about range anxiety. I said just rent a car for that trip but that wasn't acceptable to him; if the BEV was a lot cheaper, maybe he could have accepted this alternative.

So he ended up with the Rav4 prime. If he had not gotten that, he would not have had an EV. He would have gotten the equivalent of a non-hybrid Rav4; a regular gas car.

The result of him having his plug in hybrid with max 80km of summer range is that he essentially drives it like an EV 95% of the time. He constantly recharges it to use as little gas as possible. The availability of the platform made him lower his emissions by a decent amount whereas if he only could chose between gas or BEV, he would have chosen gas. Is it a compromise, yes. But it is still the solution that reduced his emissions by the most possible for now, given the constraints he had.

To the front of the class!

[NomoTesla]

Originally Posted by LVBMW

See much more clearly than most… There’s that smug superiority again! Ah if only we could reach your level of enlightenment. I guess we’re all too busy trying to find our ways out of those McDonalds bags.

I'm not sure why you identify with the McDo bag types or the average dumb American. I think you're more enlightened than that, and your ownership of one or more BMWs would indicate that you've made good life choices and have better taste than most.

Originally Posted by exxxviii

Bless your heart.

Totally uncalled for.

Originally Posted by EV Fan

Welcome to capitalism. Very few companies exhibit "will" (maybe some like Patagonia), most respond to market forces as they see them.

And why government mandates to move the population to superior and cleaner technologies are so important. Europe has this down. America OTOH is populated by too many pigheaded, selfish individuals who want the "liberty" to exercise their rights in diametric opposition to the rights of others. We live in a country of "my rights are more important than your rights." Look no further than guns and religion for an exercise in using one's "liberty" as a sword against others instead of a shield from oppression.