BMW i3

[cwerdna]

Since there seems to be no area for other EVs, we can discuss it here, I guess.

There were a whole bunch available for test drives during the LA Auto Show (I wasn't there) and those same vehicles were at CES in Vegas, which I test drove 2x.

Upcoming test drives in the Bay Area:
http://www.imakenews.com/weatherfordbmw/e_article002871831.cfm?x=bn86Wmn%2Cbs74t6cS
http://sfbayleafs.org/event/joint-meeting-eaa/ - mentions ride and drive

There's a massive thread at MNL at http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=721. Some comments/impressions at http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=15540. I made some posts there too.

There's also http://www.mybmwi3.com/forum/. Car's shipping in Europe already. Will be in the US in 2Q 2014. Starts at ~$41K.

 

[Blackmamba]

Its appeal won't go much further than those diehard BMW fanatics interested in EVs. Too expensive, too bizzare looking, nothing special about range and performance. The range extender is a poorly conceived play upon what GM has in the less expensive Volt. The i3s is too expensive for how little it would be used, and when it would be used its performance and range is insufficient for long trips. Best to shed the excess weight save the cash and go full EV, but as said, full EV range and performance is not going to knock the socks off of the Spark EV which costs half as much after tax credits are counted in.

The i3's suicide door setup is not user friendly. Ingress to/egress from rear seat virtually impossible when parked alongside anything, such as in your typical parking lots outside Safeway, Walmart, Costco, Best Buy, etc. etc.

Abundant carbon fiber usage in body parts is technically cool, but don't get banged up in it because fixing it is going to be very expensive, if it can be done at all.

And guess where they put the charging door? Bad joke. :roll:

 

[TonyWilliams]

Abundant carbon fiber usage in body parts is technically cool, but don't get banged up in it because fixing it is going to be very expensive, if it can be done at all.

And guess where they put the charging door? Bad joke. :roll:

Carbon fiber isn't going to be hard to fix, but it will be a while before body shops figure it out.

They put the charging / refueling door in three locations.

In Japan, a CHAdeMO goes in the right rear quarter, the petrol in the right front fender, and the J1772 port is under the hood.

For the USA and Europe, a Frankenplug will go in the right rear quarter and petrol in the right front fender.

 

[Blackmamba]

For the USA and Europe, a Frankenplug will go in the right rear quarter

So any way you look at it, a driver has to walk to the back and around to the other side of the i3 in order to plug it in. For those who've already got a charger installed in their garage, it's probably located on the driver's side or the front of the car, assuming you drive into your garage straight on forward. If that's the case, you might have to back the i3 into the garage in order to plug it in. Or go thru the trouble and extra cost of moving the charger.

For those who are just entering the EV world, you'll just have to put up with the inconvenience of circling around your i3 every time you plug it in.

And this is supposed to be one of the superior 'purpose-built' EVs. :shock:

 

[TonyWilliams]

After owning two LEAFs with both the J1772 and the CHAdeMO port properly on the nose, it doesn't get any better than that.

My current Rav4 EV has the port on the left rear, exactly where the gasoline inlet is on the oil version of this car. It's a pain in the *ss every time I use it. I have to back into angled parking to get close enough to plug in. In the garage, the plug sticks out to block egress to the rear (I park in the farthest left stall in my garage with a wall on the left).

So, BMW got all the failings of a rear port on the side, plus they made it farther away from the driver. The theory that BMW used is that everybody parallel parks on a city street with charge stations on the right curb. Of course, that's very rare here in the USA where we have many cities built out after the introduction of the automobile.

 

[SanDiego]

The port on the nose of the Leaf always seemed logical to me, but as it turns out, for our garage setup it would be a really bad location. The left front fender location on the Spark just happens to work much better than any other location would.

 

[Blackmamba]

The port on the nose of the Leaf always seemed logical to me, but as it turns out, for our garage setup it would be a really bad location. The left front fender location on the Spark just happens to work much better than any other location would.

For garage charging, left front fender location is the ideal location. Drivers must have space to open their door and get out, which means the charge port will always be accessible. Too many garages are set up with shelves, appliances, etc. located at where the front of the car ends up, resulting in limited to no space to access a front port.

 

[fengshui]

For garage charging, left front fender location is the ideal location. Drivers must have space to open their door and get out, which means the charge port will always be accessible. Too many garages are set up with shelves, appliances, etc. located at where the front of the car ends up, resulting in limited to no space to access a front port.

Left front fender does work well, as does left rear fender on the Tesla. Both leverage the reality that the driver needs to exit the vehicle on that side, and generally walks away by heading forward or rear from there.

 

[nozferatu]

I think you guys are missing the point with the BMW...it's a technology demonstrator on more than just the "EV" level...materials, lightness, chassis design, concept, recycling.

If you want EV's to be "more efficient", then these concepts also need to be incorporated and automotive design needs to change from the standard, wasteful, bulky ways things are designed now.

It's new...it'll take time to get used to and time for things to be figured out. But if no one adopted these things then people here who don't want to adopt it early won't get these new technologies later either. To make a fuss about where the charging port is should the the least of your worries in terms of future EV availability and performance.

The i3 is substantially larger than the Spark...probably even more utilitarian than a Leaf...yet it weighs FAR less than both...even with the battery pack in there. That's what your paying for at this stage of the game. Give it time...the next iteration will even be better.

We plan on taking a very close look at this car when it's available and if the fanboys out there aren't lining up like fools to pay well over MSRP for it, we may just get one to replace our POS Rav4.

 

[cwerdna]

To make a fuss about where the charging port is should the the least of your worries in terms of future EV availability and performance.

Disagree. If you buy an EV, you'll be charging it on a regular basis. The placement of the inlet can make a difference from a convenience point or ability to charge point of view, esp. if you're using an existing EVSE that you can't move, esp. if it's not yours to move. Poor placement means can mean one may need to inconveniently back into a spot or park funny/at a weird angle. And, needing to back in if in tight spaces (e.g. very tight garage w/stuff on both sides) can lead to car or property damage.

At my work, the way 2 sets of EVSEs are placed (in two different locations in the garage), the leftmost spot is perfectly usable by a Leaf parked head in (inlet at nose of car). A normally parked Spark EV or Volt (inlet on driver's side front fender) can't use it. A Model S (inlet at driver's side rear) has to back in to use it.

I found out (via an email thread @ work) that the spot can be usable by a Volt if they either back in so that their bumper is virtually against the wall (some folks have some parking sensor option so they need to listen for a certain signal) or they have to park head in at a weird angle, crossing over the lines. I've seen it done, as the workaround.

Pics of the needing to park at a funny angle: https://picasaweb.google.com/105684180251177299188/EVAndPHEVRelated?authkey=Gv1sRgCMKf7KPw0OPlZQ#. (The Volt is not mine. The blue Leaf is mine.)

In the case of the normally parked Volts in that spot (both backed in and head in) where they've left their charge door open, indicating they need a charge, I've sometimes had to email the owners saying "hey, I tried to plug you in but the cable won't reach. You're going to need to swap spaces w/someone or use another space." This was before I learned of the two workarounds.

replace our POS Rav4.

ICEV or EV?

 

[fengshui]

At my work, the way 2 sets of EVSEs are placed (in two different locations in the garage), the leftmost spot is perfectly usable by a Leaf parked head in (inlet at nose of car). A normally parked Spark EV or Volt (inlet on driver's side front fender) can't use it. A Model S (inlet at driver's side rear) has to back in to use it.

Pics of the needing to park at a funny angle: https://picasaweb.google.com/105684180251177299188/EVAndPHEVRelated?authkey=Gv1sRgCMKf7KPw0OPlZQ#. (The Volt is not mine. The blue Leaf is mine.)

That's a really odd place to put a chargepoint station serving two spaces. Everywhere else I've seen a chargepoint, they put it right between the two parking spaces, and the cables are long enough to reach the receptacles on both cars. Here they put it in the middle of the right space, which does make it hard for the left-side mounted cars in the left space. Perhaps that was a single EV1 charger before they replaced it with the dual chargepoint?

 

[nozferatu]

To make a fuss about where the charging port is should the the least of your worries in terms of future EV availability and performance.

Disagree. If you buy an EV, you'll be charging it on a regular basis. The placement of the inlet can make a difference from a convenience point or ability to charge point of view, esp. if you're using an existing EVSE that you can't move, esp. if it's not yours to move. Poor placement means can mean one may need to inconveniently back into a spot or park funny/at a weird angle. And, needing to back in if in tight spaces (e.g. very tight garage w/stuff on both sides) can lead to car or property damage.

At my work, the way 2 sets of EVSEs are placed (in two different locations in the garage), the leftmost spot is perfectly usable by a Leaf parked head in (inlet at nose of car). A normally parked Spark EV or Volt (inlet on driver's side front fender) can't use it. A Model S (inlet at driver's side rear) has to back in to use it.

I found out (via an email thread @ work) that the spot can be usable by a Volt if they either back in so that their bumper is virtually against the wall (some folks have some parking sensor option so they need to listen for a certain signal) or they have to park head in at a weird angle, crossing over the lines. I've seen it done, as the workaround.

Pics of the needing to park at a funny angle: https://picasaweb.google.com/105684180251177299188/EVAndPHEVRelated?authkey=Gv1sRgCMKf7KPw0OPlZQ#. (The Volt is not mine. The blue Leaf is mine.)

In the case of the normally parked Volts in that spot (both backed in and head in) where they've left their charge door open, indicating they need a charge, I've sometimes had to email the owners saying "hey, I tried to plug you in but the cable won't reach. You're going to need to swap spaces w/someone or use another space." This was before I learned of the two workarounds.

replace our POS Rav4.

ICEV or EV?

All I can say is that this is a nuisance more than an issue. There are far too many other interesting and cutting edge components on this car to write it off due to charge port location.

Our RAV4 is standard 4 cylinder car.

 

[cwerdna]

At my work, the way 2 sets of EVSEs are placed (in two different locations in the garage), the leftmost spot is perfectly usable by a Leaf parked head in (inlet at nose of car). A normally parked Spark EV or Volt (inlet on driver's side front fender) can't use it. A Model S (inlet at driver's side rear) has to back in to use it.

Pics of the needing to park at a funny angle: https://picasaweb.google.com/105684180251177299188/EVAndPHEVRelated?authkey=Gv1sRgCMKf7KPw0OPlZQ#. (The Volt is not mine. The blue Leaf is mine.)

That's a really odd place to put a chargepoint station serving two spaces. Everywhere else I've seen a chargepoint, they put it right between the two parking spaces, and the cables are long enough to reach the receptacles on both cars. Here they put it in the middle of the right space, which does make it hard for the left-side mounted cars in the left space. Perhaps that was a single EV1 charger before they replaced it with the dual chargepoint?

I added two more pics as context. The Volt and my Leaf were parked under building A. I added pics of the setup on those levels of buildings A and B, which are basically the same.

In the right corner is an EVSE w/1 J1772 handle and 1 120 volt outlet under corrugated metal door (CT2100 series of http://web.archive.org/web/20130403092428/http://chargepoint.com/products-chargepoint-stations.php). That serves the corner spot.

The middle has CT2000 series units w/2 J1772 handles and that serves 2 or 3 spots. The issue is reaching over to the leftmost spot w/o Volts parking funny (or being almost against the wall backed in).

I only joined the company about 7 months ago, so all that stuff predates me. I doubt EV1 charging stations were there before because I believe the building was completed in 06 (from what I've read, haven't asked people).

 

[fengshui]

Yep, just strange. Whoever designed that setup wasn't paying attention. Both stations should be shifted over by one space to the left, and then it would be fine for all four vehicles.

 

[gra]

All I can say is that this is a nuisance more than an issue. There are far too many other interesting and cutting edge components on this car to write it off due to charge port location.

No, because a what's a minor nuisance at first becomes a major irritation when you have to deal with it all the time. Kind of like having to stop at a QC every day to make your commute. Because I keep my cars for so many years, I make sure that the ergonomics and switchology of frequently used controls provide as little aggravation as possible - I'll be dealing with them every time I use the car, so why ad an unnecessary layer of irritation?

I have a couple of such irritants on my current car, a 2003 Forester XS. Both involve the climate controls. It came with automatic climate control, which I never use and always turn off. But any time you turn on any part of the climate control, it always starts with ACC on and I have to reach down and turn ACC off, checking to make sure it's off (and recirc is too) by looking down because the switch gives little tactile or aural feedback. In addition, the air direction rotary selector switch uses electronic switching rather than manual detents; to change the setting from say dash vents to floor vents, you rotate the switch to the right and hold it against the stop, and it steps through the settings, showing you which one it's in by a light. This forces me to look down to confirm I'm in the mode I want, which would be completely unnecessary if they just used a rotary switch with manual detents.

The base model Forester didn't come with ACC and worked exactly how I wanted it to. I knew about these issues before I bought the car, and decided to put up with them because it was the only way to get other options that I absolutely wanted (4-wheel discs, electronic brake force distribution, limited slip differential), which were only offered on the higher trim level. But I knew the climate controls would bug me every time I used them, and so they have for the past 11 years. I told Subaru they were dumb and apparently a lot of other people did too, because I noticed that a few years later they'd altered the HVAC controls on the ACC-equipped cars so that it didn't start up with ACC on, and the air direction selector had manual detents. Of course, the simplest approach would have been to make ACC an option on the higher trim level cars, but that wouldn't allow them to bundle it with other options and charge more, like every other Japanese car company does.

BMW really has little excuse for the placement of the charge port, given that the Mini-E and Active-E preceded it. They've managed to select just about the worst possible location for it, but then I can't see the value of the i3 at its current price in any case, so expect the sales will be poor for lots of other reasons.

 

[nozferatu]

All I can say is that this is a nuisance more than an issue. There are far too many other interesting and cutting edge components on this car to write it off due to charge port location.

No, because a what's a minor nuisance at first becomes a major irritation when you have to deal with it all the time. Kind of like having to stop at a QC every day to make your commute. Because I keep my cars for so many years, I make sure that the ergonomics and switchology of frequently used controls provide as little aggravation as possible - I'll be dealing with them every time I use the car, so why ad an unnecessary layer of irritation?

I have a couple of such irritants on my current car, a 2003 Forester XS. Both involve the climate controls. It came with automatic climate control, which I never use and always turn off. But any time you turn on any part of the climate control, it always starts with ACC on and I have to reach down and turn ACC off, checking to make sure it's off (and recirc is too) by looking down because the switch gives little tactile or aural feedback. In addition, the air direction rotary selector switch uses electronic switching rather than manual detents; to change the setting from say dash vents to floor vents, you rotate the switch to the right and hold it against the stop, and it steps through the settings, showing you which one it's in by a light. This forces me to look down to confirm I'm in the mode I want, which would be completely unnecessary if they just used a rotary switch with manual detents.

The base model Forester didn't come with ACC and worked exactly how I wanted it to. I knew about these issues before I bought the car, and decided to put up with them because it was the only way to get other options that I absolutely wanted (4-wheel discs, electronic brake force distribution, limited slip differential), which were only offered on the higher trim level. But I knew the climate controls would bug me every time I used them, and so they have for the past 11 years. I told Subaru they were dumb and apparently a lot of other people did too, because I noticed that a few years later they'd altered the HVAC controls on the ACC-equipped cars so that it didn't start up with ACC on, and the air direction selector had manual detents. Of course, the simplest approach would have been to make ACC an option on the higher trim level cars, but that wouldn't allow them to bundle it with other options and charge more, like every other Japanese car company does.

BMW really has little excuse for the placement of the charge port, given that the Mini-E and Active-E preceded it. They've managed to select just about the worst possible location for it, but then I can't see the value of the i3 at its current price in any case, so expect the sales will be poor for lots of other reasons.

I have no doubt it's an irritant but I like to focus on all the cutting edge stuff the car has to offer and will be, IMO, the future of cars to come. Like your Subaru, things will be changed and modified and made better. And just like you did, people will buy the car because they want it and like to have it. No car is perfect. And BMW may have either overlooked this particular design issue or it may be intentional for reasons unbenounced to us. But it's a car worth looking at if you want a premium brand EV at a relatively attainable price (definitely more attainable that a rich man's toy Tesla).

However you better hope the sales are good for the sake of future EV's and the technology this incorporates into its weight savings design approach. It's a technology that early adopters will appreciate and pave the way for other EV's that you and I will be able to buy thanks to them.

 

[TonyWilliams]

... focus on all the cutting edge stuff the car has to offer and will be, IMO, the future of cars to come.

If the future of EV's is ugly, small, 4 passenger, sub-100 mile range cars with no place to quick charge it, we're doomed anyway.

 

[SanDiego]

If the future of EV's is ugly, small, 4 passenger, sub-100 mile range cars with no place to quick charge it, we're doomed anyway.

Hey Tony, from the perspective of a Spark driver, small is beautiful... well, a least more beautiful than that Rav4 you're driving - and faster too!

 

[nozferatu]

... focus on all the cutting edge stuff the car has to offer and will be, IMO, the future of cars to come.

If the future of EV's is ugly, small, 4 passenger, sub-100 mile range cars with no place to quick charge it, we're doomed anyway.

Indeed...if the technology being incorporated in the BMW is not being appreciated for what it is then yes....EVs are doomed. Its success is critical.

And I have to agree with the above poster, small doesnt make it bad...not everyone wants an SUV or gargantuan Tesla Model S.

 

[TonyWilliams]

And I have to agree with the above poster, small doesnt make it bad...not everyone wants an SUV or gargantuan Tesla Model S.

Sub-compact cars like i3 and Spark are something like 2% of total fleet sales in the USA. Basing mass appeal EV hopes on them is folly.