MINI explains the drop in estimated range for MINI E
MINI E - click above for high-res image gallery
Those paying close attention might have noticed that as MINI USA has been delivering battery-powered MINI Es in recent weeks, the range estimate is being quoted as 100 miles. Last November, when we first saw and drove the MINI E, the range was estimated at 156 miles. When we actually drove the car in LA, the rate of decline of the estimated range was in fact closer to the new estimate than the original. In 6.5 miles we went from 72 to 49 percent charge.
We contacted MINI USA spokeswoman Nathalie Bauthers to learn more about the discrepancy. It turns out that the original 156-mile estimate was based on a California Air Resources Board protocol for testing zero emissions vehicles and was in fact a straight highway test. At the time that was the only number available as the EPA calculations were not yet completed. The EPA takes the raw numbers from ZEV range tests (just as they do with raw fuel consumption numbers) and puts them into a formula to make some adjustments. Those adjusted numbers are what is reported on the range/mileage sticker.
The MINI E is certainly not the first EV to fall short of range estimates and probably won't be the last. Going forward, hopefully, the EPA will be keeping an eye on real world results of EVs and making adjustments to the range formula just as they have with the mileage formula to give customers more realistic results. If not, early adopters of EVs are going to find themselves sadly disappointed with the vehicles.
Gallery: Quick Drive: MINI E
Photos Copyright ©2008 Sam Abuelsamid / Weblogs, Inc.
[Source: BMW]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Yanquetino 8:10PM (7/13/2009)
Most of the MINI E lessees who post blogs seem pleased with their 100-mile range. It apparently helps alleviate "range anxiety" with a quick glance at the charge gauge: 1% of charge = 1 mile of range. Simple.
I don't get the impression that any of them really expected the touted 156-mile range, because BMW spokespeople stated several times before delivery started that only under "very ideal conditions" would that be possible.
Let this be a lesson to EV manufacturers, however: when CARB provides them a range estimate, they should reduce it by 1/3rd before telling consumers what to expect, lest anybody accuse them of "false advertising."
Reply
why not the LS2LS7? 9:50PM (7/13/2009)
I don't think you know what "range anxiety" means.
You are always free to read your gas gauge conservatively, in fact you're smart to do so. But it'd be nice to know you are doing so! I mean, if you can't trust the figures you have, how do you know you're even being conservative?
These figures were not provided from CARB to them, just the testing protocol was. They performed the tests. And it behooves them to sanity check the figures they get. If they do the test and it's all highway and they know their car doesn't do nearly that well in normal use (which is weird, vehicles with regenerative braking usually do better in the city), then they should reduce the figures themselves, because otherwise they know they are misleading with their numbers.
Yanquetino 10:28PM (7/13/2009)
LS2LS7: Guffaw, guffaw!
Gee... let me be more accurate with my intended meaning: "when the CARB ***protocol*** provides them a range estimate...." Better?
You say that I "don't know what range anxiety means"? Wow. I guess that I'm really thick.
Again, since you desire more accuracy, the point I was trying to make is that the "match" between the 100-mile range and the large 0%-to-100% charge gauge, right in front of the driver eyes, makes it quicker and easier to project the ***remaining range*** while driving.
Say you're cruising along and see a sign that says: "Podunk - 37 miles". With a quick glance at that gauge, you see that the needle is pointing to 50. Yeeeesss! You'll likely make it to Podunk, with range to spare.
That is MUCH easier than trying to squint at the small red numbers at the bottom of the gauge to figure out what the remaining range is, all the while feeling a mounting "anxiety," especially when those numbers keep going up and down and up and down (according to the lessees in their blogs).
Joce03 9:01PM (7/13/2009)
Even at 100 miles, this vehicle would be perfect for me (and probably most daily commuters). I can't wait till the day they become more common.
Reply
tim 1:28AM (7/14/2009)
Joce03 you can buy one from EV innovations now with a 120 mile range. I drove one at the Alt Car Expo last year in Santa Monica, it was a zippy car to drive.
why not the LS2LS7? 9:51PM (7/13/2009)
This vehicle is a dud, confirmed.
Losing two seats seemed like the worst thing they could do to this vehicle, but they found a worse thing to do. No wonder it's not offered for sale.
Reply
Snoopy 10:57PM (7/13/2009)
Sorry LS,
I can understand that not having more than two seats can be annoying, but what exactly are you basing the "dud" classification on?
If it's a fully functioning vehicle with a limited range, yes, the range thing is unfortunate, but aside from that it's fully functioning.
why not the LS2LS7? 11:35PM (7/13/2009)
It's a fully functioning two seater that costs a lot, requires significant expensive equipment to be installed at your house and has a very short range. And the high cost is somewhat academic because they won't even sell it to you, only lease it.
Sound familiar? Sounds like a vehicle that was marketed a decade ago and couldn't find customers. Why? Because you had to have a garage that you own and can modify. That means homeowner. You realistically had to have a 2nd car for what this one can't drive far enough for, that means older with some money, probably have a family. And you had to have a use for a 2-seater, which families have less use for than young people.
There have been gobs of short-range conversion cars that even kept the back seat offered in the market and they haven't made an impact either. I can't see how this will be any different. It's a dud.
I still anxiously await the fully-functioning, 4-seat electric family car. Then the electric car will have an actual impact on the market. This one, like the cars the preceded it doesn't do this and thus is a dud.
Matt Lenart 10:44PM (7/13/2009)
bring back the NiMH RAV4-EV that STILL gets 90 miles per charge on a much cheaper and greener battery. a ten year old retrofit of a normal ICE RAV4.
i've never seen technology "advance" backwards, but it certainly seems that way.
mister obama... cut through the red tape that is keeping this patent behind closed doors and make it available to USDM car makers... or everyone... chevron certainly isn't doing anything with it.... except posting losses every quarter through their subsidiary--cobasys.
Reply
ziv 9:24AM (7/17/2009)
This car goes 100 miles if you drive gently, 70 or 80 if you drive a bit aggressively, obviously less if you drive like a loon.
We aren't talking about range anxiety when you drive most electric cars, it is range irritation. I want to own an electric car, but I don't want to have a 100 mile limit to my day, barring a fast charge that will take three times as long as filling up at a gas station and will still reduce the life expectancy of my battery. Most normal cars give you a driving range of 300+ miles at a minimum. You don't need it every day, but you need it often enough than when a battery powered car doesn't deliver it, that BEV is worth a lot less. The Mini-E is a perfect example of why the Chevy Volt is going to be a hit. I will be able to drive 40 miles all electric with the Volt. No gasoline. 25 days out of the month Exxon is a distant memory. But the days I have to drive more, the ICE kicks in and I don't have to worry about fast charges degrading my battery, or my spending 30 minutes watching my 'fast charge' slowly return my battery to 80% of a full charge, or, even worse, running out of juice on a stormy road a few miles from home.
I hope to buy a BEV in 10 or 12 years when the technology matures, but in 2 or 3 years, the best technology in town will be an EREV.
Reply
ray 3:41PM (7/18/2009)
Hey marlowx... lol
ziv,
I can only speak real world and don't have to deal with hypothetical situations the reason is I have owned this car for 6 months. ICE car have unlimited range as there are gas stations everywhere. Imho.
I agree with you about the Volts potential. If indeed 70% of drivers drive approx. less than 40 miles/day. Exxon is a memory most of the time. This will be great for national security and make it easier to implement a smart grid as the Volt will not rely on electricity alone.
In my case I have a Corvette, Silverado and 1-ton work van to drive if the E-car can't do the job. My experience has been that in that six months I have had to use the work van as the equipment in it is very heavy and actually runs off the van's motor. Other than that I have put about 200 miles maybe 300 on my truck to go motorcycle riding and snow skiing in that same time I have put 6,700 miles on the e-car. Truth be known when the warranty is up on my e-yaris I will put a trailer hitch on it and take my dirt bike up into the woods as I believe it will make it and back. Also I can make it up skiing no problem if they just had a place for me to plug in at the lodge. I would not be able to stop and pick up my buddy and his bike with the e-car. I would not be able to take four other people snow skiing either but in both cases they could drive themselves.
I am driving my Corvette as the e-car is in the shop. I will also say I don't like the complications of serial or parallel hybrids mechanically. All E is much simpler and less weight.
As far as running out of juice most places I am going I am familiar with, if not familiar with my destination I use google maps and Garmin so it is easy not to get stranded and it is fun. I have triple A in worst case scenario but there is always cell phone range problems too. I like the adventure. It's like traveling in a covered wagon across the country. Well maybe not.
marlowx 8:00PM (7/16/2009)
suckers...
-=sigh=-
Reply
van leasing 2:24AM (7/14/2009)
The Mini is a small car that was produced by the British Motor Corporation (BMC) and its successors from 1959 until 2000. The original is considered an icon of the 1960s,and its space-saving front-wheel-drive layout (that allowed 80% of the area of the car's floorpan to be used for passengers and luggage) influenced a generation of car-makers.van leasing
Reply
Joe Bonaparte 9:48AM (7/14/2009)
I drove one of these on Sunday night. It was pretty awesome. The first electric car I ever drove. It was like what I thought the future cars would be like when I was a kid. Fast, too. Silent, smooth. So inspired to work on my ev conversion.
Reply
David Martin 11:09AM (7/14/2009)
This is a conversion of an existing production vehicle, using early examples of advanced batteries and operating mostly as a test-bed to give BMW data.
That gives us a clue as to what will improve things.
Purpose designed electric vehicles, for a start.
Volkswagen are leading a project to reduce body-frame weight by 30%, and with purpose built design batteries will go underfloor, not replace the back seat.
Innovations like more efficient heaters, not to mention higher energy density batteries, will improve the range, as will better aerodynamics.
It's early days, folks!
Reply
ray 12:26PM (7/14/2009)
If you want a EV with back seats, there is Tesla s model and Nissan cube. Both scheduled to come out soon Nissan will be first. Most drivers go down the street alone. I really like my Yaris, it went a 133 miles recently 70% at 55 mph with the air conditioning on all electric. There is little range anxiety once you know your cars capabilities. There is no special equipment needed to charge. They can make a car with a back seat it will just be bigger and more expensive.
When I am pushing range yes I am more frugal with the accelerator, same as with pushing range to get to a gas station. When I am buzzing around town I don't worry about range and punch it wich is most of the time. To me it is fun experimenting with my car, to see were I can and can't make it and why. So far I have made it every where cause I am not stupid. The only reason it has been inconvenient so far is because some asses won't even let you plug into 110 and opportunity charge. Or you have to run an extension cord through a parking lot that the ICE cars run over. We remodeled a condo at the beach recently and there was no place to plug in. I would think people would be pumped to let you plug in but they are stingy. Guess it goes back to peoples the time when people were switching from horses to ICE some people just didn't get it.
Carb are a bunch of dorks we all should know that by now, that said they did do some good twenty years ago by insisting the EV1 be for sale. The E Mini is a scam they don't plan on producing it. It is away for BMW to skirt some laws. Can you say crush. Ray
Reply
why not the LS2LS7? 10:16PM (7/14/2009)
It's not a question as to whether drivers usually drive alone. It's a question as to what you need and what you are willing to buy. Buyers are used to getting more car then they need. Telling them to expect to get less car than they need despite paying more just isn't going to fly.
Electricity costs money. Even at 110V/15A, you can use about 15kWh in an 8-hour night. That's about $1.50 worth of electricity, or $500/year. With 220V you can quadruple this! Why are you expecting people to give you your fuel for free? Every time I go to the gas station to fill up, they want me to PAY them. Crazy, eh?
ray 11:00PM (7/14/2009)
In 6,700 miles I have had use for extra passenger seats twice. One time they just sat in the cargo area. In the interest of full disclosure I do not have a family so the demand is not there as if I did. Buyers aren't paying more, they are paying less every time they don't go to the petrol station. As with the Mini the whole thing is not crash tested. The Nissan will be and it will have back seats, if they were smart they would offer different battery pack option for those who need longer range. The Nissan will be a OEM. I test drove the Nissan and liked it better than my car.
As far as the electricity that pack will only hold a $1.80 at NW prices for a 120 mile range. I was lead to believe that charging at 220 would be more efficient not less. I would pay them more than what the electricity is worth if I was able to opportunity charge at those condos. I could charge there while I was working instead of waiting to charge else where to return the 110 miles home.
Really they should do there part for the environment and just let me charge for free, if they have some one over seas fighting in the war they should thank me for being an early adopter and as EV's are such a novelty. It would have been a $1.80 at most. The confusion comes when for all they know I could draw $50.00 in electricity in an hour.
Reply
why not the LS2LS7? 1:43AM (7/15/2009)
Doesn't matter.
People are used to buying extra seats for when they do need them, not buying a 2 seater and then not having them when they need them 5% of the time. You're making the same argument as Ed Begley, Jr. He says that electric cars can only satisfy people's needs 90% of the time. And he's right. But most people aren't really interested in buying a 90% car when there are 99% cars for 1/3rd the price.
As to the idea that buyers aren't paying more, that's completely ridiculous. You pay FAR more up front. I can get a Miata for $23K. What is the chance this car is $23K? I'm guessing it's a lot more.
If you want to charge 110 miles in a short time (like during the day), you're gonna need 220V,50A service. Installing that is quite an expenditure. They'd have to charge a lot over the going rate to offer it to you.
Give up on the idea that you should get your electricity for free. If you got it for free, there would be 15 people like you showing up every day in no time, and then they'd be giving out $23 in electricity/day or $8,000 worth a year. And again, that's only at 110V. It could be $30,000 at 220V.
I think you're confused about why 220V would mean 4x the costs. That's not because it's less efficient, it's because you can take 4x the power. In 8 hours, you can only fill your car to less than 1/3rd of capacity from 110V. In 220V you could fill it completely. More energy put in means means you have to pay for more energy.
You can't draw $50 electricity in an hour. That'd be 500kW, even at 600V you'd have to have about 800A service to do that in an hour.
NeilBlanchard 11:32PM (7/14/2009)
Hi,
I wonder about the rather odd choice that BMW has made with the strong regeneration built into the throttle, and whether this is adversely affecting the range? I would think that being able to easily coast would help a lot with the range.
I think they do not understand ecodriving, and their choice with this seems to show this.
Sincerely, Neil
Reply