5 days, 250 miles, AC died

BMW i3 Forum

Help Support BMW i3 Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Boatguy

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 5, 2014
Messages
301
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
I enjoyed the i3 for 5 days and 250 miles, then the AC died yesterday. Testing this morning it also seemed like the heat wasn't working either. The fan speed did change with the temp selected.

I took it to the dealer today and they didn't even both to come out and check out the symptoms; they just hustled around to get me a loaner (228i). I asked about software updates and they said "BMW is issuing so many we can't keep up with them". They had no idea what was wrong and told me to expect them to have the car for at least 4-5 days. My sense was that they were essentially clueless with respect to the i3.

I can only hope there is a mechanic who is more familiar with the car than the SA's were.
 
Yep, that's almost exactly when my AC died. Software update fixed mine (now at 1k mi).

The software update should take 4 hours, not 4 days.
 
When my A/C stopped working, Germany asked technicians to perform additional checks. Which added a couple of days, I think they are ere'ing on the side of caution and whenever somebody brings a problem in they collect absolutely everything they can.
 
I had same issue, fixed in early August by a software update. I understand that the problem affected BEVs with heat pump option. Since the update, which affected a number of items including the rate of AC charge (dropped from 7Kwh to 6Kwh), nav display, reversing display, range calculation and regen (last two are my opinions not necesssarily factual).

Otherwise have done just over 7,000 miles since April, very happy. :)
 
They just called and said they did the s/w update and I can pick it up this afternoon.

Annoying part is that the CA told me the s/w update had been installed...
 
Car back today, only down 1 day. They did a software update 07-503 software update referenced earlier, though my SA called it the 14-07-203 software update. He clearly knew nothing about what it changed, he was just happy to tell me that the AC was working again! Then he asked me where all his customers were getting so much information!

This obviously could have been, and should have been, installed before they delivered the car a week ago. Tell me again why we have dealers?

In any case, back on the road!
 
Buskraut said:
Yep, that's almost exactly when my AC died. Software update fixed mine (now at 1k mi).

The software update should take 4 hours, not 4 days.

Ive gone thru 2 software updates at 2 different dealers and both took 4 days. the car sat for 3 of those days waiting for BMW NA in Jersey to remote into the car and perform the update.

Mine is still at the dealer starting it's 3rd week down for a long list of issues that have yet to be fixed.
 
M2140 said:
Buskraut said:
Yep, that's almost exactly when my AC died. Software update fixed mine (now at 1k mi).

The software update should take 4 hours, not 4 days.

Ive gone thru 2 software updates at 2 different dealers and both took 4 days. the car sat for 3 of those days waiting for BMW NA in Jersey to remote into the car and perform the update.

Mine is still at the dealer starting it's 3rd week down for a long list of issues that have yet to be fixed.
Sorry to hear that. Very frustrating. Yesterday my dealer didn't even have a working internet connection. The factory is way ahead of the dealer network with the i3.
 
Zzzoom3 said:
Because our laws won't allow manufacturers to sell to us directly. Outdated law from outdated days when it was instituted ...
This isn't true everywhere in the USA, but it certainly is some places...the dealer network is a strong lobby, and they don't want to be cut out by the manufacturer. You can blame it on politics, but also think if all of the dealers were owned by the manufacturers, they would essentially set the price, and the competition would be less. We have these laws so we don't end up in the situation like you have with Apple and say Bose and even WeatherTech stuff (what may seem like a better price usually ends up being identical once you include shipping)...they'll let you sell it, but if you try to discount more than corporate wants, they will stop supplying you. The laws we have prevent car dealers from being in the same situation.
 
jadnashuanh said:
Zzzoom3 said:
Because our laws won't allow manufacturers to sell to us directly. Outdated law from outdated days when it was instituted ...
This isn't true everywhere in the USA, but it certainly is some places...the dealer network is a strong lobby, and they don't want to be cut out by the manufacturer. You can blame it on politics, but also think if all of the dealers were owned by the manufacturers, they would essentially set the price, and the competition would be less. We have these laws so we don't end up in the situation like you have with Apple and say Bose and even WeatherTech stuff (what may seem like a better price usually ends up being identical once you include shipping)...they'll let you sell it, but if you try to discount more than corporate wants, they will stop supplying you. The laws we have prevent car dealers from being in the same situation.
I completely disagree that the laws increase competition and protect the consumer. Direct selling by the manufacturer does not end competition between manufacturers. Apple and Tesla certainly control the final selling price, but you can always buy a phone from Samsung, LG, HTC or Motorola, and a car from BMW, Nissan, Toyota, etc. etc. I personally far prefer the customer experience with Apple and Tesla when compared to the customer experience at Best Buy, Mercedes or BMW.

The laws protector dealers, pure and simple, they do not protect consumers.
 
Would you feel the same way if all of the BMW dealers charged exactly the same price for their cars - no competition between them, even to the level of what your trade-in was worth? Competition between manufacturers happens with them providing the dealers with incentives to try for more market share. FOrget the buying experience...if you're going to pay the same price for a product wherever you shop, you might choose a place that looks nicer or is closer, or more convenient, but many people shop by price. That doesn't happen when the sellers all agree to hold the price constant. We have laws about that, they're called monopolies, and we try to avoid them when possible. Certainly, you can choose a different phone, but if you want an iPhone, you're going to essentially pay the same thing wherever you buy it. Would you really like that to be true with a car? Saturn tried that and see where that got them!
 
jadnashuanh said:
Would you feel the same way if all of the BMW dealers charged exactly the same price for their cars - no competition between them, even to the level of what your trade-in was worth? Competition between manufacturers happens with them providing the dealers with incentives to try for more market share. FOrget the buying experience...if you're going to pay the same price for a product wherever you shop, you might choose a place that looks nicer or is closer, or more convenient, but many people shop by price. That doesn't happen when the sellers all agree to hold the price constant. We have laws about that, they're called monopolies, and we try to avoid them when possible. Certainly, you can choose a different phone, but if you want an iPhone, you're going to essentially pay the same thing wherever you buy it. Would you really like that to be true with a car? Saturn tried that and see where that got them!
You're mixing business models and laws. The alternative universe is not that all BMW dealers charge the same, but that dealers don't exist and BMW has stores like Apple and Tesla. Answering your question in that context, my answer is YES because the service and customer experience would be vastly improved. I have no objection, and a strong preference, for dealing directly with the manufacturer. My experience, whether Mercedes, Lexus, Porsche or BMW is that dealers do not add value, only expense.

Saturn tried to sell a mediocre product and poorly differentiated product through an incompetent dealer network. Tesla's success clearly shows that there is nothing flawed in the manufacturer direct business model. I've never read or heard of a Tesla customer complaining that they had to buy direct from Tesla.

Think about it, dealers run a retail store and make a profit. The same stores if operated by BMW would have a lower operating expense if they were all owned and operated by BMW (aggregating dealerships and reducing expense is the backbone of the Auto Nation and Penske business model). Now there is a profit to be distributed, an even bigger profit than the aggregate profits of all the dealerships because we've reduced the cost of running the store and thus increased the profits. The profits could go to the manufacturer running the store in the form of net margins, or to the consumer in the form of a lower price.

Dell did this to the PC industry and utterly destroyed computer retailers, lowering costs for the consumer in the process. That's what the car dealerships are afraid of. Do you feel that the death of computer retailers damaged or benefited you as a consumer? Do you prefer dealing with the iPhone service guy at Best Buy or the Genius Bar at Apple? Where do you get better service?

More specifically, if there was a BMW store and a BMW dealer both equal distance from your home, where would you expect to get better information about your i3?

Monopolies exist when one manufacturer has a very large share of a the market for a given category of product, like Microsoft for PC operating systems. Monopoly is not a applicable concept in the context of a specific product in a category. This is most definitely no vendor with a monopoly in either cars or telephones. Samsung has the highest market share for mobile phones in 2013 at 25% while Apple has a mere 8%. Do you think Apple has a monopoly and you're being cheated as a consumer? Ending dealerships would not result in creating any monopolies. You are more likely to be manipulated as a consumer by the aggregation of dealer ownership by corporations such as Auto Nation who, for example, owns BMW Mountain View and BMW Fremont which certainly reduces the competition among BMW dealers in the SF South Bay. Give them 10 more years and they will further reduce competition.

BMW has a monopoly on the i3. They can raise prices anytime they want. Having dealerships does not change that fact.

Neither of us want to be manipulated by monopolies, but this is not a likely situation in the auto or mobile phone markets. There are plenty of manufacturers and lots of competition, the existence of dealers does nothing to enhance or diminish the level of competition for our vehicle spending dollars.
 
Back
Top