[DannoBills]

Interesting tidbit from BMW. I personnaly think 600kms is plenty!

BMW Exec Says Automaker Is Capping EV Range At 373 Miles (600Km)

While a nearly 400-mile range is a solid estimate for an EV produced today, it's interesting that BMW has no intention of striving for more range going forward.

insideevs.com

 

[Lord]

I want more range. It doesn't matter if I need it or if I can do without it.
I want as much as range technology can give us, even thousands of kilometres.
And I want my smartphone to last for months too.

 

[jagMRY]

Look at any study of EV buyer intent and range is the number one issue. For electric vehicles to find true parity with gas-powered vehicles, something in the 400 to 500 mile range is where they need to be. As it happens, Mercedes, Tesla and Lucid have already gotten there. If they can do it, why can't BMW? Maybe BMW is just tap dancing and stalling for time, but it is hard for me to believe that they have decided to settle for 300 miles and call it a day. I'm already disappointed that the i4 is not built on a dedicated electric platform, a regrettable compromise. Now this.

 

[Ringwraith]

I think 600km is definitely enough if
1. You can get that range at typical highway speeds
2. You can get that range using only the part of the charging curve that is reasonably fast(10-80% for the i4)
3. Most charging spots have food/coffee within walking distance(so that the 20-30 minutes wait isn't idle time)
4. You don't lose a large portion of the range when it's cold out

Since that is most likely not the case, BMW just comes off as defending being behind the curve

 

[tssb]

I am afraid that the reality that Ferrufino hides is more uncomfortable. Today's mounting rigs and the technology BMW uses in its electrics limit the ability to increase range. The executives were comfortably waiting for 2025 counting their combustion sales.

 

[illian_ger]

This is the limitation of the current battery technology, which every manufacturer uses! Sure you can implement a bigger battery, but the increase in weight brings a bunch of other problems with it. The electric motor and the software are actually very efficient as already seen in the ix3.
Sure you can improve the drag coefficient, but then your car will most likely have the same shape as the EQS/EQE!
So what is left?? Improve the battery's capacity and weight and you will get your improvement in range.
That is why BMW and others are working on a solid state battery atm.

 

[illian_ger]

Look at any study of EV buyer intent and range is the number one issue. For electric vehicles to find true parity with gas-powered vehicles, something in the 400 to 500 mile range is where they need to be. As it happens, Mercedes, Tesla and Lucid have already gotten there. If they can do it, why can't BMW? Maybe BMW is just tap dancing and stalling for time, but it is hard for me to believe that they have decided to settle for 300 miles and call it a day. I'm already disappointed that the i4 is not built on a dedicated electric platform, a regrettable compromise. Now this.

The Model S, EQS and Lucid are way bigger cars with bigger batteries (>100kwh), so of course they have a better range...but look at the lucid pure with a similar sized battery: wltp 540km. I don't really see where they are better at range?!
Since BMW is working with new battery technologies, therefor better range and charging speeds are coming.

 

[Buford T. Justice]

It seems that BMW is not the only one:

Elon Musk announces Tesla is canceling Model S Plaid+, don’t really need more than 400-mile range

When Electrek asked Musk to clarify the statement, the CEO told us that Tesla is not seeing a need for a range of more than 400 miles anymore:

“What we are seeing is that once you have a range above 400 miles, more range doesn’t really matter. There are essentially zero trips above 400 miles where the driver doesn’t need to stop for restroom, food, coffee, etc. anyway.”

 

[Lord]

There is a saying in Greek:
Όσα δεν φτάνει η αλεπού τα κάνει κρεμαστάρια.
It literally translates to:
Whatever the Fox can't reach (because it's very high) she says that she puts it there deliberately.

They hit a wall in technology and cost, and they say "Oh, it's enough. You don't need more".
Don't tell me what I need or what is enough for me.
Bill Gates said some time ago that 640k of Ram is enough.
Well...guess what. It isn't.
Elon Musk follows his steps.
And who told you, BMW or Samsung or Apple executive, that I want to charge my phone 1 or 2 or more times every day. I want to charge and forget.
I want to charge my car and start a careless trip enjoying, not looking colourful animations stressing about what percentage of battery I will have when AND IF I reach the next charger.

 

[tssb]

600 km should be ok, but for real range for long trips (120-130 Km/h) and in different scenarios (summer/winter, wind, weight etc). That should be no less than 800/900 km in WLTP terms.
I repeat: what Ferrufino hides is more uncomfortable.

 

[Buford T. Justice]

If I get the numbers correctly (just some quick googling) for mass market cars

Tesla Model 3 LR: Range 614km WLTP
VW ID3: Range up to 522km WLTP
BMW i4 40: up to 590km WLTP
Kia EV6: up to 528km WLTP
?

So yes, it might be we are currently hitting an uncomfortable limitation with the current technology. Let's hope for some breakthrough...

 

[Inception]

I completely disagree that more than 600km of range is required in any scenario.

Let me illustrate. Say 65% of all trips are under 20km. 20% are under 200km, 10% are under 600km and 5% are between 600-2000km. Out of those longest trips, it seems unlikely that you can’t either fast charge or charge overnight, and that you wouldn’t want to have a break at the same time.
If you imagine the battery as 100 building blocks, how many of these blocks see heavy, moderate and close to inexistent use?

85% of the time, 50 of those blocks are dead weight. If you add more blocks, for 99 out of every 100 trips, you would only be carrying more dead weight.
For every block you are not using on every trip, that cell is dead weight, polluting to produce, wears your tires more, makes the car worse to drive, and costs you money without giving anything back.
The optimal range is the range you are willing to drive in one session, plus the practical range of getting to a fast chargers, plus spare capacity for peace of mind. I’d say that’s 450km, for me. In addition it should be able to handle a long day of many errands city driving of course.

If you add more cells to todays battery of the i4, you will add weight that only gets utilized the times you need to drive very, very far, with it any charging options, practically <1% of trips. It’s an unrealistic edge case and that’s why BMW is focusing on home charging and realistic use cases. It’s not hard to make a car with a huge battery, but just.. why would you.

 

[illian_ger]

I completely disagree that more than 600km of range is required in any scenario.

Let me illustrate. Say 65% of all trips are under 20km. 20% are under 200km, 10% are under 600km and 5% are between 600-2000km. Out of those longest trips, it seems unlikely that you can’t either fast charge or charge overnight, and that you wouldn’t want to have a break at the same time.
If you imagine the battery as 100 building blocks, how many of these blocks see heavy, moderate and close to inexistent use?

85% of the time, 50 of those blocks are dead weight. If you add more blocks, for 99 out of every 100 trips, you would only be carrying more dead weight.
For every block you are not using on every trip, that cell is dead weight, polluting to produce, wears your tires more, makes the car worse to drive, and costs you money without giving anything back.
The optimal range is the range you are willing to drive in one session, plus the practical range of getting to a fast chargers, plus spare capacity for peace of mind. I’d say that’s 450km, for me. In addition it should be able to handle a long day of many errands city driving of course.

If you add more cells to todays battery of the i4, you will add weight that only gets utilized the times you need to drive very, very far, with it any charging options, practically <1% of trips. It’s an unrealistic edge case and that’s why BMW is focusing on home charging and realistic use cases. It’s not hard to make a car with a huge battery, but just.. why would you.

Thank you, this is absolutely correct! There is nothing to hide, just simple statistics No need to create a very heavy car for those 5% cases..

 

[tssb]

I completely disagree that more than 600km of range is required in any scenario.

Let me illustrate. Say 65% of all trips are under 20km. 20% are under 200km, 10% are under 600km and 5% are between 600-2000km. Out of those longest trips, it seems unlikely that you can’t either fast charge or charge overnight, and that you wouldn’t want to have a break at the same time.
If you imagine the battery as 100 building blocks, how many of these blocks see heavy, moderate and close to inexistent use?

85% of the time, 50 of those blocks are dead weight. If you add more blocks, for 99 out of every 100 trips, you would only be carrying more dead weight.
For every block you are not using on every trip, that cell is dead weight, polluting to produce, wears your tires more, makes the car worse to drive, and costs you money without giving anything back.
The optimal range is the range you are willing to drive in one session, plus the practical range of getting to a fast chargers, plus spare capacity for peace of mind. I’d say that’s 450km, for me. In addition it should be able to handle a long day of many errands city driving of course.

If you add more cells to todays battery of the i4, you will add weight that only gets utilized the times you need to drive very, very far, with it any charging options, practically <1% of trips. It’s an unrealistic edge case and that’s why BMW is focusing on home charging and realistic use cases. It’s not hard to make a car with a huge battery, but just.. why would you.

I partially agree, but a few clarifications:

1.- Ferrufino is not talking about i4, is talking about the max capacity for any model of the brand. That includes future luxury travel vehicles with worse aerodynamics and efficiency, like iX, i5, i7 even iX7.
2.- The question is not how often you use the total range. The question is what is your level of freedom of movement or your capacity to do unforeseen movements with the actual max range and charging times.
3.- If competitors continue to push up in some segments (cited in point 1), what will say Ferrufino? Are they all wrong except him? Will BMW present a 600 WLTP i7 versus 800 WLTP (or even more in that year) competitors?
4.- Ferrufino is forgetting that BMW does not have its own charging network or even the best fast charging on the market.
5.- Perhaps in two or three years, when the charging networks have grown (not all markets are the Netherlands or Germany), and the charges be much faster, their statements could make some sense, but today we are still far away.
6.- Technology is advancing very fast. To affirm that something does not make sense because you are not able to achieve it is foolish.

 

[tssb]

Thank you, this is absolutely correct! There is nothing to hide, just simple statistics No need to create a very heavy car for those 5% cases..

Ok. So don't build cars with more than 100CV. They are not necessary except for 5% of the cases.

 

[illian_ger]

Ok. So don't build cars with more than 100CV. They are not necessary except for 5% of the cases.

Sure, because what is a CV?

 

[tssb]

Sure, because what is a CV?

Sorry. HP.

 

[illian_ger]

Sorry. HP.

Adding more HP to a motor (or adding a second/third motor) is fairly straightforward. A bigger battery needs space, which results in a bigger/heavier and more expensive car. So for the 5% cases we all would need to drive around in our eqs. Hence this is why Tesla build a 1000HP car instead of a 1000km range car..
The only solution is a new battery technology, which no one has atm

 

[tssb]

Adding more HP to a motor (or adding a second/third motor) is fairly straightforward. A bigger battery needs space, which results in a bigger/heavier and more expensive car. So for the 5% cases we all would need to drive around in our eqs. Hence this is why Tesla build a 1000HP car instead of a 1000km range car..
The only solution is a new battery technology, which no one has atm

The argument that adding more HP is straightforward is not exact. You need a better chassis, suspension, bigger tires... etc. More complexity and expensive... for the 5% of the use.

The problem here is that we are arguing from different points of view. You don't need more range, ok. But BMW has closed the discussion, so people with frequent winter trips (one example) will have to look at other luxury brands because the stubbornness of a management team that goes against the tide.

 

[Inception]

I'm living in a country where I very much go on winter trips. They can be up to abouut.. 400km each way. I wouldn't mind fast charging for 20 minutes during the way at all, if it means having a €15.000 cheaper and 300kg lighter car. Maybe it's a personal preference, but I think it's all psychological. You'll never get the cornering ability and feeling of nimbleness back from adding all that weight, no matter what you do.
Motor performance has a lot to do with having a big enough battery, need more cells to give a parallel load. I know for the P100D Tesla had to develop a new metal for conducting the power from the battery to the HV distribution system.
I like sports car, but I definitely think there's a limit somewhere. The power output of the i4 M50 is pretty good, and anything over that seems almost unnecessary from my point of view. I use the maximum of my car quite often, and you can use the maximum power of a car whenever you want, but you can only use the maximum range when you have spent all of the other energy capacity first, so it's not really comparable, is it.