[rjd_F30]

Originally Posted by ynguldyn

Of course 50 means different things. You have i4 M50, 50e in various models with various combinations of engines and EMs, now 50 for cars with B58.

Not so sure about that. The model designations have always been consistent. Obviously now they mean different things for ICE vs BEV, but 50 means the same thing in G05 and G60 PHEV/ICE. Not sure why it wouldn’t for the new 3.

[ynguldyn]

Originally Posted by rjd_F30

but 50 means the same thing in G05 and G60 PHEV/ICE.

50e and 50i (about to become just "50") are obviously different things.

[baron95]

Originally Posted by ynguldyn

It's pretty simple actually. Once the transition is complete, 7-8 years from now, Neue Klasse is going to be the primary platform for all BMWs and at least some MINIs. Today, we have FAAR and CLAR because FWD and RWD have different optimizations, for EVs the difference doesn't exist so you'll get NCAR for everything. We already know that it will cover the complete range of sedan/coupe models, from i1 to i7, and most of the SUV range, from iX1 to iX4,

Thanks for taking the time to answer - this is fascinating info, that for the first time makes sense exciting.

I was just looking at the BMW 1H/2023 report, and it is interesting how the sales volumes are spread relatively evenly throughout the product line. I don't recall another automaker that has such an even spread.

[baron95]

Originally Posted by DocWeatherington

The biggest problem with EVs is the lack of reliable charging network and the mass ability to charge 10s of millions of cars daily in the US. Let alone in we'll developed countries.

Think about a large apartment complex with 300 cars, not possbile.

Actually the apartment complex is a relatively straightforward one to solve - much easier than those parking on the street.

Remember that it will be a very slow ramp over many years until even 1/2 of those 300 units will have an EV.

Currently, about 1% of the vehicle fleet is EV. So that apartment complex could easily get by with about 3 charging ports and a reservation system.

Next year it may need 6. The year after maybe 10. In 10 years it may need 50 or so Level 2 charging ports at ~10KW each. Those chargers will have Powerpack-type batteries, that will charge during the day, when residents are away (and the solar roof is pumping), and discharge overnight when unit residents are charging their cars.

There is zero technological challenges.

There is a capital cost. But buildings that have charging infrastructure will command higher rents, and the utility company will be interested in meeting demand. So between the utility and building owners, I see no issue in making the capital investment.

And there is no appreciable change in peak demand to the grid from those chargers.

There is sooooo much time to address the issues. EVs will only hit 10% of the fleet years from now.

[DocWeatherington]

baron95

Many parking garages likely wont have 220 access and where not designed for wall outlets... who is going to pay for those upgrades ( mine has zero wall outlets over 4 stories of parking) or some 30yr old building. The only option would be to tap the hanging lights and reroute.

Let alone think about a major metro in which people commute during the day then return for the bulk of charging during the 6p until 6 a.m... 80% of the cars in my 14-story high rises are gone during the day.

The idea that battery storage in an apartment building or solar would be enough isn't realistic.

Solar in a home doesn't make 100kw a day to charge EVs never mind these 200kw evs.

Even the Telsa wall option is only 15kw of storage capacity per pack. If a garage has 700kw of charging needs your going to need 50 units to store that and 700kw would be let's say 15 average EVs. That would be a million dollars on storage which are items that will fail as it's a battery likely in 5-10yrs doing commercial grade usage.

Another point is the weight of the vehicles on the garage itself.


How many charging stations in the next 3 years will be obsolete?

Tesla charging network works because they have not changed any of the performance metrics since day one. If they figure hey we can do 1000kw based upon new tech and charge a car in 2min safely using solid state batteries but would need a power line that runs at 1200kw. The system would need to be refreshed from start to end point.

Many issues need to address but the point being.... before a force is made the system needs to be tested. Physical infrastructure needs to be updated, the power grid, the ability to charge/make, the ability for the electric energy to flow from start to end point as the tech changes hasn't been thought out.

[ynguldyn]

Originally Posted by DocWeatherington

baron95

Many parking garages likely wont have 220 access and where not designed for wall outlets... who is going to pay for those upgrades ( mine has zero wall outlets over 4 stories of parking) or some 30yr old building. The only option would be to tap the hanging lights and reroute.

The landlord. The necessary incentives (free market ones, not government) exist.

Let alone think about a major metro in which people commute during the day then return for the bulk of charging during the 6p until 6 a.m... 80% of the cars in my 14-story high rises are gone during the day.

So they charge exactly when ACs don't need to work so hard? Great!

The idea that battery storage in an apartment building or solar would be enough isn't realistic.

Solar in a home doesn't make 100kw a day to charge EVs never mind these 200kw evs.

Even the Telsa wall option is only 15kw of storage capacity per pack. If a garage has 700kw of charging needs your going to need 50 units to store that and 700kw would be let's say 15 average EVs. That would be a million dollars on storage which are items that will fail as it's a battery likely in 5-10yrs doing commercial grade usage.

First, units: kW is a unit of power. kWh is a unit of energy. You're using "kw" for both, which makes your understanding of the physics and math suspect.

In any case, a large apartment building's roof can easily hold a 100kW system. At a conservative 200W/m2, you need 500m2 of area, or a 20m x 25m system. The average daily production of such a system in my area would be 600-800kWh, or closer to 1MWh in any southern state. The average daily commute in the US is less than 40 miles; let's double that to 80 miles to include other driving. A Model 3 consumes 250Wh/mile, which means it needs 20kWh daily charge. Most other EVs are less efficient, so let's take 30kWh per car per day. Our solar system, therefore, will be able to fully charge a fleet of 20-25 cars in a northern state, and over 30 cars in a souther state, with no grid dependency whatsoever.

A battery pack for this kind of system will not be a stack of Powerwalls but a larger and more cost effective system that Tesla offers to businesses and energy storage facilities. But even with a stack of Powerwalls, at ~$8K per, you would need to spend $16K per supported car, assuming the worst case scenario of no car charging during the day, and zero grid connectivity. In reality, the battery storage needs to hold approximately half the energy required by the EV fleet. If the landlord adds $100/mo/car in rent, they will break even easily.

Another point is the weight of the vehicles on the garage itself.

As if Americans are driving small and light cars today.

How many charging stations in the next 3 years will be obsolete?

Tesla charging network works because they have not changed any of the performance metrics since day one. If they figure hey we can do 1000kw based upon new tech and charge a car in 2min safely using solid state batteries but would need a power line that runs at 1200kw. The system would need to be refreshed from start to end point.

This imaginary scenario has no connection to home charging. Level 2 is sufficient for that today and will be in the future. As for road network, it can be upgraded as needed (and Tesla has been doing that already), though the modern 250kW deployments are fast enough already for most real life scenarios (read: human drivers without unlimited urine storage).

Many issues need to address but the point being.... before a force is made the system needs to be tested. Physical infrastructure needs to be updated, the power grid, the ability to charge/make, the ability for the electric energy to flow from start to end point as the tech changes hasn't been thought out.

There is nothing you can think of that hasn't been thought of - and responded to - by professionals.

[DocWeatherington]

Originally Posted by ynguldyn

The landlord. The necessary incentives (free market ones, not government) exist.
So they charge exactly when ACs don't need to work so hard? Great!
First, units: kW is a unit of power. kWh is a unit of energy. You're using "kw" for both, which makes your understanding of the physics and math suspect.

In any case, a large apartment building's roof can easily hold a 100kW system. At a conservative 200W/m2, you need 500m2 of area, or a 20m x 25m system. The average daily production of such a system in my area would be 600-800kWh, or closer to 1MWh in any southern state. The average daily commute in the US is less than 40 miles; let's double that to 80 miles to include other driving. A Model 3 consumes 250Wh/mile, which means it needs 20kWh daily charge. Most other EVs are less efficient, so let's take 30kWh per car per day. Our solar system, therefore, will be able to fully charge a fleet of 20-25 cars in a northern state, and over 30 cars in a souther state, with no grid dependency whatsoever.

A battery pack for this kind of system will not be a stack of Powerwalls but a larger and more cost effective system that Tesla offers to businesses and energy storage facilities. But even with a stack of Powerwalls, at ~$8K per, you would need to spend $16K per supported car, assuming the worst case scenario of no car charging during the day, and zero grid connectivity. In reality, the battery storage needs to hold approximately half the energy required by the EV fleet. If the landlord adds $100/mo/car in rent, they will break even easily.
As if Americans are driving small and light cars today.
This imaginary scenario has no connection to home charging. Level 2 is sufficient for that today and will be in the future. As for road network, it can be upgraded as needed (and Tesla has been doing that already), though the modern 250kW deployments are fast enough already for most real life scenarios (read: human drivers without unlimited urine storage).

There is nothing you can think of that hasn't been thought of - and responded to - by professionals.

On my phone had to log into the computer. For some reason, I'm having issues. With the app today. That's a typo on my end its kWh.


I believe this is going to be one in which we disagree on aspects.

To charge from what percentage? Americans wouldn't settle for just enough juice to fill 30-40 miles a day as an acceptable response in a major metro ( I live in a metro of over 9 million people) when you could spend 30 minutes sitting in traffic to drive 10 miles. With the idea of you (the consumer) are only allowed x amount of usage so others can get juice to share whatever amount we can produce via renewable sources in a reasonable cost system wouldn’t work here. You should witness the craziness when we have gas shortages.

Its kwH, the Tesla Wall 2 which is stateside among the best battery storage. Is only 13.5kwh, Simple math if your home could produce and store 100kwh a day you would need to have 7 of these to fully charge a car from 0-100%. If you had a model s that 100kwh or a Hummer that's 200 kwh.
I believe this is going to be one in which we disagree on aspects.

Its kWh, the Tesla Wall 2 which is stateside among the best battery storage. Is only 13.5kwh, Simple math if your home could produce and store 100kwh a day, you would need to have 7 of these to fully charge a car from 0-100%. If you had a model s that 100kwh or a Hummer that's 200 kWh
I have not seen any consumer-grade battery packs that have the capacity to store 100kwh or more. I live in a 14-story high-rise building in which the roof has a pool, outdoor patio area, BBQs and a clubhouse which is concept is probably no more than 1800 sqft of space with a clean roof.

Outside of that one spot, there is nowhere else to put solar panels unless they converted sidewalk and grass space for solar which wouldn't happen as people would have nowhere to let dogs piss. My building has 400 spaces and most likely 275ish cars. Right now, maybe 20 EVs, which all are Tesla’s but zero charging stations or power outlets.

Agree fully on the king-size SUVs and pickups unless you have use case

In relation to home charging and solar panels watch this video.. guy presents his use case but you can see never was able to charge the car fully in all cases nor enough storage energy. Also note not all his appliances are electric so some datasets aren't represented.

[ynguldyn]

Originally Posted by DocWeatherington

On my phone had to log into the computer. For some reason, I'm having issues. With the app today. That's a typo on my end its kWh.

No, not a typo. You use the kW and kWh values in the same statements as if they are the same thing that can be compared, which is obviously incorrect.

I believe this is going to be one in which we disagree on aspects.

To charge from what percentage? Americans wouldn't settle for just enough juice to fill 30-40 miles a day as an acceptable response in a major metro ( I live in a metro of over 9 million people) when you could spend 30 minutes sitting in traffic to drive 10 miles. With the idea of you (the consumer) are only allowed x amount of usage so others can get juice to share whatever amount we can produce via renewable sources in a reasonable cost system wouldn’t work here. You should witness the craziness when we have gas shortages.

You didn't pay attention to my calculations. I based them on 80 miles driven per day. This is very generous - very few cars are driven 25,000 miles a year. The time spent in traffic is irrelevant - the only power consumed in that situation is AC or heating, approximately 500W, or ~1 mile worth in that imaginary 30 minute traffic jam.

(BTW, the scenarios you're coming up with clearly show that you have no real life experience of living with an EV.)

Its kwH, the Tesla Wall 2 which is stateside among the best battery storage. Is only 13.5kwh, Simple math if your home could produce and store 100kwh a day you would need to have 7 of these to fully charge a car from 0-100%. If you had a model s that 100kwh or a Hummer that's 200 kwh.

To have the need to fully charge a 100kWh battery from 0 to 100, first you need to get that battery to 0. The only way to do that is drive. Depending on the car, that would be a 250-350 mile drive in a single day. Which 99.99% of Americans do only a few days a year, if at all.

Again: the average commute is less than 40 miles. The average yearly mileage of a car in the US is 14,200 miles. 40 miles per day. 10-15kWh per day. Half of what I used for my calculations above. That's all the charging infrastructure needs to support.

Hummer EV is an abomination that only little-penised men care about. It needs to die.

I believe this is going to be one in which we disagree on aspects.

Our disagreement is between real life experience and fairy-tale-like theorizing.

I have not seen any consumer-grade battery packs that have the capacity to store 100kwh or more.

You don't need to store 100kWh per car. You only need to store the amount needed by a car after a day of driving (again: 40 miles on average) less daytime charging when energy flows directly from the panels into the car. A single Powerwall is sufficient to cover an average EV, and having a large enough fleet in the same place actually allows all cars in it to be treated as average.

I live in a 14-story high-rise building in which the roof has a pool, outdoor patio area, BBQs and a clubhouse which is concept is probably no more than 1800 sqft of space with a clean roof.

Outside of that one spot, there is nowhere else to put solar panels unless they converted sidewalk and grass space for solar which wouldn't happen as people would have nowhere to let dogs piss. My building has 400 spaces and most likely 275ish cars. Right now, maybe 20 EVs, which all are Tesla’s but zero charging stations or power outlets.

Not every building can be easily made self-sufficient. In your case, the landlord can build an ~30kW system, the rest of the power will need to be delivered by the utility. But the absence of chargers clearly looks like a wasted opportunity: there's enough delta between utility and Supercharger rates to spend money on chargers and a few batteries to smooth out consumption peaks, and resell that power to EV owners at a profit.

In relation to home charging and solar panels watch this video.. guy presents his use case but you can see never was able to charge the car fully in all cases nor enough storage energy. Also note not all his appliances are electric so some datasets aren't represented.

This is not about the car. Marques has a huge house, his AC system consumes much more power, the car's needs are negligible in comparison. Look at his numbers for summer vs spring/fall. There were months when his roof produced more energy than was needed by all the household consumers and the excess was sold to the utility.

But again: you had to watch this video, I didn't. Your view of this technology and its needs is based on your best understanding of other people's videos or descriptions. I have an actual Tesla roof on my house, an actual Tesla car in the driveway, and actual statistics of our household's energy needs in the app.

I would pay attention to your M5 ownership experience.

[DocWeatherington]

Originally Posted by ynguldyn

This is not about the car. Marques has a huge house, his AC system consumes much more power, the car's needs are negligible in comparison. Look at his numbers for summer vs spring/fall. There were months when his roof produced more energy than was needed by all the household consumers and the excess was sold to the utility.

But again: you had to watch this video, I didn't. Your view of this technology and its needs is based on your best understanding of other people's videos or descriptions. I have an actual Tesla roof on my house, an actual Tesla car in the driveway, and actual statistics of our household's energy needs in the app.

I would pay attention to your M5 ownership experience.

Your feisty ... I like it

I, we use EVs at work and the use case doesn't work for what we need as they pushed it on us. I've moved on from a M5 to a 23 M3 actually and am looking forward to the next gen hybrid M5.

Also, I had an IX on order but it got stuck at port and gave me more time to get into the details and my use case.

I've driven and used Tesla's and a few of other EVs.


I'm not an EV hater either. I've lived in big cities, small cities and the middle of no where an use to put 20k a year on a beater and work vehicles use to do on average 300 miles a day.


Again missing my point 99% of American aren't going to have a Tesla and or a solar roof. 90% of American isn't going to be able to afford a solar roof big enough to power a (that's energy efficient too) home and charge a car.

The idea that solar roof is going to be enough to charge an EV is false for the average person. It maybe for 80 miles of range a day if you have the ability to store 20kwh again 90%.

90% of America isn't going to be satisfied with the current ability to charge.

In his case that is true but if your in AZ with the temps which average 98 degrees in the summer and 70 degrees in the winter it's likely your not coming ahead or.... you live in the NW with tons of cloud coverage. Or the fact that you run an electric heater vs gas in the winter and have colder temps. In his use case he runs off natural gas for heat vs an electric furnace.

[Ramos]

The big question for 3 series enthusiasts looking to move to an EV, do you get the last gen of the ice cars G50, gas or EV i4 or do you dive in to the first gen of Neo class??

I assume both will be offered in the US concurrently?

[ynguldyn]

Originally Posted by DocWeatherington

Your feisty ... I like it

Yes, I'm trying to be as nice as I can.

I, we use EVs at work and the use case doesn't work for what we need as they pushed it on us. I've moved on from a M5 to a 23 M3 actually and am looking forward to the next gen hybrid M5.

Also, I had an IX on order but it got stuck at port and gave me more time to get into the details and my use case.

I've driven and used Tesla's and a few of other EVs.

There's a difference between driving an EV and living with it (5 years now).

Again missing my point 99% of American aren't going to have a Tesla and or a solar roof. 90% of American isn't going to be able to afford a solar roof big enough to power a (that's energy efficient too) home and charge a car.

This is obviously incorrect. Of course, low income households will be left behind, just like they are being left behind with any advances this country makes, from clean air to internet access to education to healthcare. However, household solar is very affordable. Most importantly, whether or not you use the energy to charge the car, it pays for itself - and quickly. In my case, I'm actually never going to be in the red. Tesla offers 10 year loans with 10% down, I'm going to get more than my downpayment back from grandpa Joe when I file my taxes in January, and then my savings on the electrical bill will be almost equal to my monthly payment on the loan. Once the loan is paid off, it's free money.

The idea that solar roof is going to be enough to charge an EV is false for the average person. It maybe for 80 miles of range a day if you have the ability to store 20kwh again 90%.

90% of America isn't going to be satisfied with the current ability to charge.

90% of America drives less than 80 miles a day. 90% of America can find an affordable deal that would include a pair of Powerwalls or equivalent batteries from a competitor.

In his case that is true but if your in AZ with the temps which average 98 degrees in the summer and 70 degrees in the winter it's likely your not coming ahead or.... you live in the NW with tons of cloud coverage.

AZ is the ideal place for solar. Sunny days, little seasonal variation. Consistent power supply for the ACs. Northwest has less sun but also less heating or cooling needs

Or the fact that you run an electric heater vs gas in the winter and have colder temps. In his use case he runs off natural gas for heat vs an electric furnace.

No sane person would combine a solar system with an electric furnace. Heat pumps are affordable, have tons of subsidies or rebates from the utilities, and are cheaper to run than even a natural gas system.

Look. I understand you're hitting me with your best arguments now. And still they keep missing the mark because your understanding of the technology doesn't go deeper than Youtube videos or conservative propaganda. For example, if you had known better, you wouldn't have tried to use AZ or WA as "bad places" for grid independence. AZ is just obviously the perfect place for that. WA is fine, not terrible. In reality it's the East Coast, where Marques and I live, that has it worse than most places. We run ACs a lot because summers are not just hot but also humid. We still get plenty of cold days that only the newest models of heat pumps can handle (you don't want to know last winter's natural gas charges, ugh) We don't get many more sunny days than Seattle - and even when it's sunny, the haze from humidity affects solar production. We're far enough from the equator to have short winter days with sun low in the sky (rated power x cos(incidence angle)).

But even here solar systems make money for their owners.

[ynguldyn]

Originally Posted by Ramos

I assume both will be offered in the US concurrently?

Right now, this is the plan.

[DocWeatherington]

Originally Posted by ynguldyn

No sane person would combine a solar system with an electric furnace. Heat pumps are affordable, have tons of subsidies or rebates from the utilities, and are cheaper to run than even a natural gas system.

Look. I understand you're hitting me with your best arguments now. And still they keep missing the mark because your understanding of the technology doesn't go deeper than Youtube videos or conservative propaganda. For example, if you had known better, you wouldn't have tried to use AZ or WA as "bad places" for grid independence. AZ is just obviously the perfect place for that. WA is fine, not terrible. In reality it's the East Coast, where Marques and I live, that has it worse than most places. We run ACs a lot because summers are not just hot but also humid. We still get plenty of cold days that only the newest models of heat pumps can handle (you don't want to know last winter's natural gas charges, ugh) We don't get many more sunny days than Seattle - and even when it's sunny, the haze from humidity affects solar production. We're far enough from the equator to have short winter days with sun low in the sky (rated power x cos(incidence angle)).

But even here solar systems make money for their owners.

You are out of touch with reality and the basic average income and the basic American/basic person and what people are willing to invest in. Which is the majority of consumers.

You are defining a high to middle-upper-class income and a smart homeowner that has a long-term investment strategy in green energy and efficiency, that will leverage all federal, state, and local programs and resources. Weighing the costs and net returns long term. The average person isn't going to take a 10yr loan out on solar on top of the 7yr loan on the EV, on top of the 30yr home loan on top of student, and credit card debt.

You are making assumptions for the ideal perfect scenario which one can do an array of improvements and efficiency options I am not. I'm referring to the vast majority of people who are getting by in the current economic situation driving a basic 45k EV after rebate, living in apartments, old smaller homes, rental units, street parking, general debt, and may have a family, etc.

You are correct that people can make money off solar but how many people have solar and or can afford with rebates to modify their home, apartment, condo, townhouse, row house, or even get the property management/owner to do all you mentioned above to ensure it's a positive return.

But the average person/family which is the vast majority of Americans and people around the world again "use case" isn't going to do any of the above. They are going to simply rely on plugging their EVs into a standard outlet overnight and charge here and there off the public network.

The average person is going to drive the average amount as you indicated, have average income and will in all likelyness have average home living and charging ability.

In this conservative mindset as you called it. In an ideal world the governments would spend trillions of dollars and make e-fuels and do a continuous cycle of pulling the CO2 gases out of the air. They would produce a fuel in which all vehicles on the road today could use in which would have net zero impact on the environment which in turn we can use the current trillion dollar fuel delivering network we use today. They would figure out a way to make batteries last longer, charge faster, weigh less and use a combination of technology in hybrid systems giving the option of both for use case at no increased costs. They would ramp up nuclear power and figure out fusion reactors and a recycling method of spent energy.

You are correct poor people will get left behind and I will add the vast majority of middle income will as well as net availability of cash flow they are po.

[sierrat13]

Originally Posted by ASAP

Is the M350 a B58 hybrid of some sort?

Yes, this will be an updated powertrain that is currently in the X5 50e, will also be the powertrain for the M550e and X3 M50

[Alpine Wait]

So G20 is hanging around for 9 years?

[bimmerbenz65]

Originally Posted by sierrat13

Yes, this will be an updated powertrain that is currently in the X5 50e, will also be the powertrain for the M550e and X3 M50

If you read this thread, you would know this is false.

[Mii]

Next gen is using Cluster Architecture (CLAR) for the petrol option, while the electric one uses Neue Klasse blueprint according to this article.
https://www.bmw-sg.com/bmw-models/bm...ng/2023/09/13/