what do you guys think of the 330e
no vectoring, but it does have plug in feature

2016 BMW 330e Plug-In Hybrid First Drive

 

Is plug in an advantage?

 

BMW 330e Plug-in Hybrid launching in 2016


Seem to have the advantage of using no hydrocarbon fuel at all on a daily basis if the commute is short enough. Then, there is a surprisingly greater than Prius-like engine/EV mode like function that offers better performance than the dedicated fuel saving Hybrid.

If it is fun to drive, it would be a an intermediate along the Prius -RLX Sports Hybrid spectrum.

 

depends on definition of advantage
performance - no
non gas range - yes

other criteria?

 

How does the plugin impact performance? In the Prius I thought the plugin simply added additional ev range to the non gas operation. It is the size of the electric motors that effect the performance and the interplay of the use of both the electric motor and the ICE that impact performance, not whether a car has a plugin feature.

I may be missinG something and need to be educated.

 

A plug in hybrid will start off a drive with maximum battery life and maximize electric drive range (assuming you had it recharging since last use and charge is complete). It enables maximizing electric drive range, and depending on the parameters of the car, enable most commuting to be completely electric.

A hybrid is not dependent of battery charge level and may start off with battery partially or fully depleted and the hybrid technology will not limit range. The plug hybrid will also behave this way if not recharged or fully charged.

The plug in hybrid adds an additional layer of electric drive capability over a typical hybrid and has no range anxiety as with an electric plug in.

 

I'll go back and say what I told the engineers when they tried to persist:

I'm not plugging in a car for 50 miles. :-)

I'll plug in the damned car for 250 miles.

 

The irony is that for all the money you save on fuel, to get that much energy into a car for 250 miles will cost you $5-10K to have the appropriate HIGH OUTPUT outlet installed in your garage. What's the break even time on that expense? If a regular 240V outlet would give you the 22 miles in 4 hours, that would seem reasonable to convert an outlet in the garage, and that could pay for itself in likely just 2-6 months of using no fuel for commuting.

You could argue that all cars will be electric within 20 years, but by that time the cost of installing the high output outlet would likely come down, I hope.

 

First I said the plug-in had NO performance advantage.

Second, I have an EV and had 40 amp charger installed. All in (charger plus installation), was

 

why is my post being chopped off?

 

I'll try without the quoted reply

We have an i3 for 1 yr now. Installed 40W charger for ~$1500 and 1 yr later, charger is significantly less in price. It can charge from totally drained to 80 mile range in ~5 hours.
Wife is consultant and she drives to many clients in bay area from SF to San Jose and has yet to have a range issue. We have the range extender just in case, but it has never kicked in

Also they are installing very high output DC charging stations at shopping centers and supermarkets. These will charge drained battery in ~30 minutes.

 

Is your little light RED?

 

good one

for clarification, I meant 40 amp charger, not 40W

 

I certainly agree that electric cars are the future, but considering that a hot summer day can overwhelm the current electrical grid in parts of the U.S., we are still a long, long way away from a future without combustion engines. Also, taking into consideration the number of coal fired plants still in operation producing the electricity needed for a plug in car... and ULEV gas burning cars (especially efficient hybrids) seem to be a good choice for the next decade or more.

Honda's persistence with the fuel cell view of the nearer future may be a wise choice until abundant clean electrical power is readily available later this century????

My two cents.

 

Most EV owners plug in at night when grid demand is light. In fact you can program to recharge during off prime time.

I bet clean coal plants powering EVs are still better than gas cars in terms of emissions.

 

I'm not so sure. By the time you consider line losses from power plants, and the potential pollution of producing batteries, and later disposing of them or recycling them, there may be no pollution OR financial benefits. Yet. But clearly energy is that rare resource that has the potential to get cheaper with technology.

 

Yes, I think you're right on all points.

The only thing I would add is that plugging into the grid allows you to let the government decide whence the energy comes, the presumption being that we're going to evolve as time wears on, evolve to the most ecologically sound and financially rewarding sources of energy, whatever those might be.

But, still....

When I drive 120 miles/day, I just can't get that motivated to plug in for a few miles.

:-)

 

As I understand it, it takes more energy to produce and deliver ethanol than it creates when it is burned. I don't think we need to go down a line of discussing chemistry and physics unless others want to, but in general we are growing more corn to turn into ethanol than we are to feed people. How politics get into that discussion we may want to pass on for the purposes of this thread, but other than VW and their TDI diesel scandal, most cars sold today are magnitudes cleaner than ones just built 10 years ago. I think the bigger polluters are mining and construction vehicles, not to mention the manufacturing centers. It used to be that when you would drive through north central New Jersey on the Turnpike, you would have to hold your nose and put the recirculate on for your ventilation system as the smells were simply toxic. That is less so now, but it is those kinds of industrial areas that I think contribute more to pollution than ICE, Hybrid, or 100% EV vehicles do.

 

Governmentally, there are several formulae to consider. The lack of viability of ethanol when compared to pure gasoline is well known, but it's offset by economic considerations related to the farming industry, together with the political capabilities of legislators from those of the States where these farming industries are located...and then don't even get me started on Conagra.

Yes. You're right. The political shame in this is that we used to be able to give this maize to places where it was needed. Thousands more people die of starvation than used to die, because it is more economically advantages *not* to give away this maize. We are instead using it for supplementing fuel, which we are required to do by law.

Something I cannot help wondering is whether the best compromise would be to reduce the maximum ethanol content of gasoline to 5%.

Unfortunately, this would require federal legislation at a time that Congress is, let's face it, pretty damned hopeless.

 

When the ethanol legislation was passed, we assumed that about 85.00/barrel would be the best we'd hope for, assuming oil that we could easily refine.

But US and Canadian extraction technologies accelerated beyond our projections, and when you add into the equation odd political shenanigans like the Saudis being determined that OPEC would regulate prices below where they would be profitable for Iran, it looks like we're gong to be below 40.00/barrel for a long time.

The North Sea's Brent Crude is also remaining in production for longer than we anticipated, making the UK and EU less dependent, among other sources.

This is why I say that we should go down to 5% ethanol blend as something more logical. My guess is you'd probably get about 2 mpg more efficiency out of this, too. That's just a guess, though.

The great foundations on this planet would also then be able to get their hands on the excess maize production to feed countries that used to be able to depend on us.

 

The Saudis are in the black all the way down to about 28.00/barrel, but they would need to produce more oil and sell it at that cheaper price in order to continue to adequately fund the cradle to grave Saudi society.

On the other hand, Iran needs 35.00/barrel to make any money at all. Iran will export oil below 35.00/barrel in order to keep people employed, but their budget will be run at a deficit while they do this.

Meanwhile, US and UK keep pumping their own oil to make OPEC and Iran that much worse off.

Their world is collapsing, and if we're not careful there will be political and religious agitation in Saudi Arabia, Qatar and everywhere else with an autocratic, Sunni-dominated Sharia government.

 

Sometimes I talk too much. Sorry.

 

No apologies needed. I appreciate your perspective. I have done a LOT of research on this topic and agree with what you are saying 100%.

 

Nope. All interesting. We'll tell you when you're boring us. ;^)

 

Tesla produced a white paper of Source to Wheel efficiency comparing EVs to Gas cars. It included all the upstream emissions and economics to getting coal and oil from the earth to transmission losses - everything. I think they included other forms of power gen as well. As I recall the EV came ahead in every category. I'll see if I can find it. They laid out methodology if you want to challenge any of the numbers.

 

Here it is "well to wheel"

http://www.evworld.com/library/Tesla_21centuryEV.pdf

 

now the 740e
http://www.digitaltrends.com/cars/20...cs-efficiency/

looks like BMW is taking a more mileage approach than the RLX-H performance approach

 

And watch the media 'journalists' follow the same pattern. Honda / Acura introduces new tech. They try to find anything and everything to carp on and downplay it. The market follows them like lemmings.

BUT when BMW, or their brand of choice introduces a similar concept (in this case a multi motor AWD Hybrid) and IT WILL BE THE DISCOVERY OF THE CENTURY! These 'journalists' are so excited now they wet themselves.

They did the same thing when SHAWD was introduced on the 2005 RL. Then when other brands followed suit with torque vectoring they gushed. One rag ran a comparo in the RL, 5 series class cars. The BMW broke down during the comparo. They voted it the favorite.

Over the years I have learned that my needs and wants rarely follow these mental giants.

 

^^Spot on, in every respect.

 

^^^ Thanks. But the Blues beat the Lightning tonight.

 

^^ Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Every once in awhile they do win one.