[eezzee]

Agree.Frustrating that the packs are announced and equivalent lease rates but not actual costs and details of what each pack contains other than seat covers.

[cs4444]

Originally Posted by lux

Why the hell did BMW spend so much money putting all this CFRP into the car and yet there are no tangible benefits?

If the car is that much lighter than the competition, I would have expected:

1) Extended range without an engine

2) Faster acceleration times

3) Better handling / dynamic driving

The first two are a big fail. Hopefully the i3 does better in the last category, otherwise all this CFRP talk is marketing BS.

The i3 weighs around 25% less than a leaf (7-800lbs), it has a 30% smaller/ lighter battery (200lb less), yet gets over 30% more range without the range extender..these are all fairly significant gains.

Also the 4800lb tesla model s weighs 45% more than the i3 while getting a 44% (260 miles vs 112 max for the i3) longer range with its 1000lb battery and costing 50% more than the i3.

It seems that you get what you pay for, but the i3 is in a nice middle ground while being A LOT lighter than any rival. Which will no doubt make it the most entertaining EV.

[buckeyede06]

Originally Posted by SamS

No Ford EV interior looks like an i3.



Batteries, man. Plus all the standard safety features required by regulation. If you want a 1500lb car, you'll need an Ariel Atom




Cause it's not supposed to be?



Two cars, two different purposes.




Why not? This is the future, like it or not. Consumers are already voting with their wallets. And BMW cannot make thirsty V8s en masse and expect to stay in business.



I bet it does superb. Check back here in 2 years

+1

[Matski]

Originally Posted by cs4444

The i3 weighs around 25% less than a leaf (7-800lbs), it has a 30% smaller/ lighter battery (200lb less), yet gets over 30% more range without the range extender..these are all fairly significant gains.

Also the 4800lb tesla model s weighs 45% more than the i3 while getting a 44% (260 miles vs 112 max for the i3) longer range with its 1000lb battery and costing 50% more than the i3.

It seems that you get what you pay for, but the i3 is in a nice middle ground while being A LOT lighter than any rival. Which will no doubt make it the most entertaining EV.

Let's also not forget this isn't some kind of autobahn cruiser... BMW will KNOW from MiniE and ActivE trials that the range offered here covers a proportion of peoples needs, for their day to day commuting..

People seem to think this car should be all things to all men.... it's not even designed to appeal to everyone on this site, so I'm not sure why people are giving it such a hard time.

[Ivan Ho]

I'm a Bimmer fan. For both reasons, its performance & look. But i3 just fails to make an appeal to me with its cute car look.

[mPlasticDesign]

Originally Posted by fyun89

Now the real deal's going to be the i8....
Hope it's less than 70k

Not a chance. 6 figure car.

[bradleyland]

Originally Posted by lux

Why the hell did BMW spend so much money putting all this CFRP into the car and yet there are no tangible benefits?

Dude, are you high? CFRP is super light-weight. The i3 weighs less than the Nissan Leaf by a good margin, and the i3 has a much higher level of refinement.

This is a city car, not a sports sedan. A 0-60 rating of 7.2 seconds from BMW is fantastic. That was the 0-60 rating of my 2006 GTI, which is a "hot hatch". This is an eco city car.

I get it, you're not in the market for a city car. That's cool. Frankly, I'm not either, but there's plenty about this car to get me excited. When BMW brings CFRP to their regular line up, it's going to result in some serious weight savings.

[Jason]

Added more videos to official info post.

[paddyrx8]

I like what BM are doing with the i3 but the shape of this car is all wrong. I've just worked out what it looks like, the first generation Audi A1, which was a sales flop. The unusual panels etc are ok, not a problem, its just the overall shape. Plus the interior touchscreens look bolted on.

They should have made it more conventionally shaped like the new type Audi A1, which is the (one of the) best looking Audi. I'm not an Audi fan by the way.

The i8 looks superb though.

[falconfabian]

"Radio has no future. Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible. X-rays will prove to be a hoax." -- William Thomson, Lord Kelvin, British scientist, 1899.

[Matski]

Originally Posted by paddyrx8

I like what BM are doing with the i3 but the shape of this car is all wrong. I've just worked out what it looks like, the first generation Audi A1, which was a sales flop. The unusual panels etc are ok, not a problem, its just the overall shape. Plus the interior touchscreens look bolted on.

They should have made it more conventionally shaped like the new type Audi A1, which is the (one of the) best looking Audi. I'm not an Audi fan by the way.

The i8 looks superb though.

First gen A1 was actually A2 I don't know if it was a flop, I still see quite a few about. Didn't this car help Audi learn their Aluminium bonding stuff?

The i3's layout is more function over form, the batteries (being so heavy) are as low as they can be, to keep the centre of gravity low, which is good for handling and interior space. It's also a city car, so tiny overhangs, and good visibility are important.

You really can't compare the i3 to any of it's conventionally powered rivals IMO.

Originally Posted by SCOTT26

...
Reading some of the comments here and I just had to put some people right.
...


The BMW i3 is only the beginning and approaching will be the progressive sports car the BMW i8 and we can't wait to tell you about that car!
Of course other models for other segments will also feature under the BMWi brand.

I have a question SCOTT, does the LifeDrive architecture of the i vehicle shorten the development time of the vehicle at all? I saw the bare CF i3 shell at BMW Park Lane, and it struck me how simple it looked.

Also... does i3 have an F or G number? The sticker on the shell at Park Lane said MCV (ie. MegaCityVehicle) is that it's internal designation?



edit:

Just done some quick calcs using manufacturers figures... the effect of the CFRP means that the i3 gets about 10.1 miles per kW of battery capacity... the Tesla S (60kw) gets 3.8 (85kwh versions even less).. so technically it's much less efficient than the i3. That's the effect of the extra ~840kg/1850lb that the Tesla has to lug around... seriously, the Tesla is heavier than a 750Li xDrive!

and, not to forget, outside the US, the Tesla is around TWICE the price of the i3.

... so imagine a BMW i5 with a battery 3 times larger (still smaller than the base Tesla)... and a lower curb weight (thanks to aluminium and CFRP construction)... I wouldn't go buying a Tesla just yet.


I am curious to know the kW/kg of the i3's batteries and the Tesla S's though.. the BMW's battery weighs about 200kg (so a 6th of the weight of the car).. how much would the i3's battery weigh if it were a 60kW/h unit?

[bimmin]

I like it. I'd get the range extender so I wont feel limited.

[rhinosaur]

I love it and I'd get one without the range extender. I am curious though about:
- where and how the batteries are produced,
- how the battery maintenance/replacement weighs in the lifelong economical equation of owning the i3,
- ecological footprint of the production of one unit.

[Mavus]

Originally Posted by lux

Why the hell did BMW spend so much money putting all this CFRP into the car and yet there are no tangible benefits?

If the car is that much lighter than the competition, I would have expected:

1) Extended range without an engine

2) Faster acceleration times

3) Better handling / dynamic driving

The first two are a big fail. Hopefully the i3 does better in the last category, otherwise all this CFRP talk is marketing BS.

Let's just say everything is acceptable for a small city car, except the price of course. However, what's up with the 650cc 2-cyl range extender weighing 330 lbs for 4K?? I mean are they joking?? Honda and Toyota must be rofl.

Can't wait to see used car values and insurance rates when collision bills start coming in for that CFRP. Low emissions is cool but $45K for fancy C-Max is out of touch with realty.

[scottmc129]

Originally Posted by Smooth 330i

Let's just say everything is acceptable for a small city car, except the price of course. However, what's up with the 650cc 2-cyl range extender weighing 330 lbs for 4K?? I mean are they joking?? Honda and Toyota must be rofl.

Can't wait to see used car values and insurance rates when collision bills start coming in for that CFRP. Low emissions is cool but $45K for fancy C-Max is out of touch with realty.

You obviously have never been in an accident in your BMW. LOL If you had you would know its never cheap. Its all labor cost bud.

Wait for the Tesla BlueStar to come out after the X Model. This is the 3 series electric everyone is wishing this 1st city car was.

[BMWRL]

Originally Posted by Pentium

I think the i8 will be something big, by the way anybody watched the last episode of TopGear? they drove the SLS Black Series VS the Electric....

Here is a small part:

This blew my mind... Amazing!

[BMWRL]

Originally Posted by debdoub

Nice concept, please bring station wagon 5 series back to the US, I'm overwhelmed with all those SUVs.

+1

[BMWRL]

Originally Posted by Smooth 330i

http://www.caranddriver.com/news/201...-and-info-news

"The i3 is propelled by a 170-hp electric motor that churns out 184 lb-ft of torque driving the rear wheels through a single-speed transmission. That’s sufficient to hurl the tall-roof vehicle from a standstill to 60 mph in 7.2 seconds, BMW says. Smiles fade soon thereafter, as top speed is limited to 93 mph. This makes the i3 the slowest series-production Bimmer since the venerable BMW 700, a two-cylinder compact, went out of production in 1965."

"BMW says that the "usable range" for the i3 is 80 to 100 miles in the car’s standard Comfort setting"

"It is reassuring that BMW offers an optional range-extender engine: a 34-hp, 650-cc two-cylinder that adds 330 pounds—and a whopping $3850 to the i3's $41,350 base sticker—of heft. Customers thus have a choice to go purely electric, Tesla-like, or enjoy the added flexibility and range of an internal-combustion engine"


expensive little piglet ...

This review lost all credibility for me... I don't understand why the i3 is compared to cars that are out of its same class and/or other regular and M BMWs. This is a totally different line within BMW like M. So what if the car is the slowest production vehicle from BMW since the 700, the i3 isn't meant for driving hooligans and its a completely different car from the 700. Haters gonna hate.... Let this car do what its supposed to do, compare it to the Leafs, Prius' etc...

[SoCali E36]

This car is growing on me more and more every day.

[akhter]

Are please on this site so dumb? Who on the right mind would cross shop between an i3 and a Tesla? One is a city car, the other an electric sports car that costs 50pc more.

BMW does have an answer for the Tesla--the i8. Wait for it to come out.

The juveniles who aspires to own an M3/M4 think every 3/5GT, i3, X4/5/6 is is BMWs next sports coupe killer and that BMW is abandoning them to mean these cars.

Relax, this is good. Thanks to this car, the M cars coming in 3-4 years will weigh hundreds of pounds less.

[Kayani_1]

I wish it was better looking.

[Touring]

Originally Posted by gaz26

I like it and have ordered a car. What is annoying is that BMM invests a billion euros but can't get the technology behind its configurator to run smoothly and it only contains limited info. Whats the point of launching a bit of the spec when you cant find out what is included in each package e.g. in the UK called Standard, Loft, Lodge and Suite. Also no details on options or the cost of them! Obviously pricey and they don't want that to come out at launch!

Poor execution of launch materials in my opinion and I would like to buy one!

Contact your dealer. I have got the complete price list on e-Mail from mine.