If BMW doesn't update the i3 significantly before 2022 they are going to be left in the dust.
Chevy has the Bolt coming out this year which will offer 200+ mile range on a EV w/no ICE.
Nissan has said they have a 35kWh Leaf coming out for 2017 which will boost the Leaf to ~130 miles, with rumors that a 200+ mile model will be coming in 2018.
Plus Tesla is supposed to be coming out with the Model 3 in late 2017/early 2018 with 200+ mile range.
Valid points, but the i3 still has a niche in the market in that it's the only series-hybrid offering out there. For certain buyers that's enough to tip the needle, 200 mile range competitors or not.
Yeah I mean I loved my BMW and I would love to buy a BMW EV, but the i3 is not in contention with the Bolt or the Leaf for me right now (and I will be getting a new one in 2017.)
I put Ford's 2021 and BMW's 2025 and so on, into the autonomy is novelty category; just like the Roomba (yes the robot vacuum cleaner). There is no possible way in that time frame that either the software, or public infrastructure, or laws and regulations, and insurance are all going to magically go "full autonomy" in major cities, let alone outside of them, in that time frame. We've been trying to do this with trains and planes for a long time and while highly automated to a degree that might surprise some people, they are not fully autonomous. And yet they don't have to share infrastructure with significantly sized objects that not only don't use the same software, but not even the same spec including fault tolerance.
And another reason why I'm gonna be a bit negative Nancy on this, is because the entire software industry sucks when it comes to software updates. About the best at it has been Apple and iOS. The worst is a toss up between the automotive industry's own proprietary navigation systems (crap UI/Ux, crap nearly non-existent ship it and forget it update) and mobile device manufacturers. There will need to be software updates for more than a decade for cars, to account for all the unknown unknowns as infrastructure and rules all change, to account for interactions with other proprietary systems, as well as humans. But this industry sucks at software updates.
On limited access highways, there are no pedestrians, no bicycles (mostly and not in traffic lanes), no turns, separation of travel in different directions, generally well-defined lanes, etc. Non-limited access highways aren't quite as straightforward but they still seem immeasurably easier than a busy city.
Yes, speeds are higher but dealing with mostly well-defined problems like sudden braking at speed is something it seems as if computers should actually be pretty good at as opposed to all the random events that happen on city streets.
[EDIT: Yes, I misread. I'm in violent agreement with the parent. :-) ]
I think we're going to see a race from two ends of the spectrum: Can Tesla ramp up production faster than traditional manufacturers learn how to build software?
I think you've hit the nail on the head here. It is an interesting race to the middle and either way consumers stand to win from it.
This is exactly the kind of situation that I think typifies the positive aspects of capitalism. You have two companies that each have one half the piece of a puzzle and are furiously trying to compete against each other to produce the other piece.
We will see a lot of different techniques tried and that could potentially lead to a lot of tangential benefits to the economy along the way.
It's more complicated than that. Tesla needs to increase their production much faster since the other manufacturers combined creates the long tail that Tesla will be competing with. Also, traditional manufacturers may rely on some industry software gold standard that lets them outsource the software development if they believe the core competency is unrealistic to develop in-house without 1) software mindset 2) time 3) money 4) organizational structure.
Musk has a reputation for firing senior managers that give him answers he doesn't like, or that fail to meet his unreasonable demands. That level of management meddling doesn't bode well for Tesla's manufacturing future. Nor does "putting parts in the car knowing [they] are bad", if the accusation (by a departed employee) is true. (http://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-sets-ambitious-goals-a...) I have previously questioned, and still do, Tesla's PLM.
Legacy manufacturers do know how to do software, despite the general lousy state of in-car entertainment systems arguing otherwise. They also know how to manufacture a quality product at scale. It's an easier task for them to bolster their software than for Tesla to learn what they already know about manufacturing and ramp up manufacturing.
OK well I'm 100% confident Ford and BMW will be in existence in 20 years. I'm maybe 80% confident Tesla will be, in any case it's definitely not 100%. So even setting aside the software updates for 10-20 years question, as if that'll even be a thing with these cars, I have less than complete certainty Tesla will be around in its present form making cars at all.
Same old same old "EV roadmap" that we've been seeing since 2005 from BMW/audi/porsche/etc. Just increase all the dates by four years and you can re-release the same old press release over and over again.
Promises of actual EVs in (four years from now) while continuing to roll out half-assed hybrid cars powered by ridiculous little lanwmower engines.
BMW is particularly guilty, given that their flagship "i" vehicle is not an EV at all and contains a clownish three-cylinder engine.
I see the current crop of "half-assed hybrid cars" as a necessary step on the road to EV market acceptance; Public charging infrastructure is not at an acceptable level for the average consumer, so automakers found a way to capitalize on the success of their existing ICE products and production lines, while gradually introducing electric technology in a usable-in-the-real-world package. Capitalism 101.
Furthermore BMW never claimed that the BMWi brand was exclusively EVs, nor have they ever marketed the i8 as anything but a plug-in hybrid.
Hey now, you're not giving the i3 enough credit. 114 miles and the another 100+ on gas. Until the Bolt comes out that puts BMW in second place for EV range, with a handy gas backup. I've seen plenty of crap compliance EVs and the i3 isn't one.
20 comments
[ 4.4 ms ] story [ 46.7 ms ] threadChevy has the Bolt coming out this year which will offer 200+ mile range on a EV w/no ICE.
Nissan has said they have a 35kWh Leaf coming out for 2017 which will boost the Leaf to ~130 miles, with rumors that a 200+ mile model will be coming in 2018.
Plus Tesla is supposed to be coming out with the Model 3 in late 2017/early 2018 with 200+ mile range.
And another reason why I'm gonna be a bit negative Nancy on this, is because the entire software industry sucks when it comes to software updates. About the best at it has been Apple and iOS. The worst is a toss up between the automotive industry's own proprietary navigation systems (crap UI/Ux, crap nearly non-existent ship it and forget it update) and mobile device manufacturers. There will need to be software updates for more than a decade for cars, to account for all the unknown unknowns as infrastructure and rules all change, to account for interactions with other proprietary systems, as well as humans. But this industry sucks at software updates.
Anyway, good luck with that BMW.
Yes, speeds are higher but dealing with mostly well-defined problems like sudden braking at speed is something it seems as if computers should actually be pretty good at as opposed to all the random events that happen on city streets.
[EDIT: Yes, I misread. I'm in violent agreement with the parent. :-) ]
Except Tesla.
I think we're going to see a race from two ends of the spectrum: Can Tesla ramp up production faster than traditional manufacturers learn how to build software?
This is exactly the kind of situation that I think typifies the positive aspects of capitalism. You have two companies that each have one half the piece of a puzzle and are furiously trying to compete against each other to produce the other piece.
We will see a lot of different techniques tried and that could potentially lead to a lot of tangential benefits to the economy along the way.
Musk has a reputation for firing senior managers that give him answers he doesn't like, or that fail to meet his unreasonable demands. That level of management meddling doesn't bode well for Tesla's manufacturing future. Nor does "putting parts in the car knowing [they] are bad", if the accusation (by a departed employee) is true. (http://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-sets-ambitious-goals-a...) I have previously questioned, and still do, Tesla's PLM.
Legacy manufacturers do know how to do software, despite the general lousy state of in-car entertainment systems arguing otherwise. They also know how to manufacture a quality product at scale. It's an easier task for them to bolster their software than for Tesla to learn what they already know about manufacturing and ramp up manufacturing.
Err ... no they don't:
Promises of actual EVs in (four years from now) while continuing to roll out half-assed hybrid cars powered by ridiculous little lanwmower engines.
BMW is particularly guilty, given that their flagship "i" vehicle is not an EV at all and contains a clownish three-cylinder engine.
Truly, a hallmark of technology.
Furthermore BMW never claimed that the BMWi brand was exclusively EVs, nor have they ever marketed the i8 as anything but a plug-in hybrid.