Gotta love these running costs...

[redbarn]

We have had our I3 Rex for a month now. My wife (the primary driver) gleefully announced that the 602 miles had cost us $9.98 in electricity, $8.87 in gas plus 2 x 40% charges at the BMW dealer.
She's not interested in energy use per mile just overrall cost.
We do charge using the business rate at my workshop but how can any ICE powered vehicle compete with this ?

 

[epirali]

We have had our I3 Rex for a month now. My wife (the primary driver) gleefully announced that the 602 miles had cost us $9.98 in electricity, $8.87 in gas plus 2 x 40% charges at the BMW dealer.
She's not interested in energy use per mile just overrall cost.
We do charge using the business rate at my workshop but how can any ICE powered vehicle compete with this ?

None, specially if you add in the cost of regular maintenance for various engine related items that are eliminated with a pure BEV. And don't forget disk brakes.

 

[redbarn]

A "12 year old" from our BMW dealer phoned up last evening and offered "a free oil change" at our next scheduled service. My wife explained that our next scheduled service would probably be in at least 12 months or more, depending on Rex usage.
Lots of I3 sales will really hurt dealership's service departments...

 

[Electron15]

A "12 year old" from our BMW dealer phoned up last evening and offered "a free oil change" at our next scheduled service. My wife explained that our next scheduled service would probably be in at least 12 months or more, depending on Rex usage.
Lots of I3 sales will really hurt dealership's service departments...

This is one of the reasons some dealerships don't really try to sell the i3. There is a BMW dealership less than 1 mile from my house, but I couldn't get them to make a decent deal - I tried - but no luck, so I drove 118 miles to a BMW dealer that worked the numbers AND knew something about the car.

And it's not just BMW, but all others with the exception of Tesla make a lot of money on the servicing of the car so why push the electric or hybrid when it's easier and more profitable to sell a gas model.

 

[Jeffj]

I agree that maintenance will be lower on an EV, but it still does exist. Currently the industry seems to be thinking roughly 30% lower maintenance. That may improve over time, but these are still mechanical beasts with tires, brakes, hydraulics, suspension, and myriad internal components that wear and will need service. The i3 has been far from "maintenance-free" in its first 15 months. A lot of that can be attributed to a completely new car introduction, but even after that, maintenance will still be required. I suspect (I don't have the data to back this up) that the maintenance visits in the first 3 years of an i3 aren't going to be substantially lower than a normal ICE. Everyone makes a big deal about no oil changes, but realistically that's maybe $150/year in an ICE, maybe even less. All the hysteria about lower maintenance is conveniently forgetting the massive increases in quality for the ICE cars in the last 15 years or so. Its rarely the engine or transmission that causes a maintenance visit in an ICE (why would an OEM offer up to 10 years or 100,000 miles drivetrain warranty if the engine/transmission was balky), at least in the first 5-7 years of life. If you eliminate that from an ICE, they are not really that different from an EV in terms of maintenance.

 

[epirali]

I agree that maintenance will be lower on an EV, but it still does exist. Currently the industry seems to be thinking roughly 30% lower maintenance. That may improve over time, but these are still mechanical beasts with tires, brakes, hydraulics, suspension, and myriad internal components that wear and will need service. The i3 has been far from "maintenance-free" in its first 15 months. A lot of that can be attributed to a completely new car introduction, but even after that, maintenance will still be required. I suspect (I don't have the data to back this up) that the maintenance visits in the first 3 years of an i3 aren't going to be substantially lower than a normal ICE. Everyone makes a big deal about no oil changes, but realistically that's maybe $150/year in an ICE, maybe even less. All the hysteria about lower maintenance is conveniently forgetting the massive increases in quality for the ICE cars in the last 15 years or so. Its rarely the engine or transmission that causes a maintenance visit in an ICE (why would an OEM offer up to 10 years or 100,000 miles drivetrain warranty if the engine/transmission was balky), at least in the first 5-7 years of life. If you eliminate that from an ICE, they are not really that different from an EV in terms of maintenance.

Well, part of the reason ICEs are more reliable are more sensors, more complex control systems, more advanced engines and transmissions. The part count alone will definitely lead to more maintenance and repairs. I know I have to spend around $500-1000 in regular maintenance foe most ICE driven 12-16k, but with the Leaf I had no maintenance. It was just simpler. The i3 is more complex, yes. But without a Rex there are less parts (moving and otherwise). Warranty obviously evens this out, but in my book simplicity always wins!

 

[spinball]

Where BEVs will kill ICE is around the 100,000 mile mark. Most seals, gaskets, hoses, fluids are deteriorated by then making long term maintenance very costly. BEVs have none of this stuff to deteriorate.

Yes, the battery is an open question but battery costs actually go down over time. I expect there to be quite a cottage industry on BEV battery replacements/upgrades in the next decade.

 

[i3marc]

I agree that maintenance will be lower on an EV, but it still does exist. Currently the industry seems to be thinking roughly 30% lower maintenance. That may improve over time, but these are still mechanical beasts with tires, brakes, hydraulics, suspension, and myriad internal components that wear and will need service. The i3 has been far from "maintenance-free" in its first 15 months. A lot of that can be attributed to a completely new car introduction, but even after that, maintenance will still be required. I suspect (I don't have the data to back this up) that the maintenance visits in the first 3 years of an i3 aren't going to be substantially lower than a normal ICE. Everyone makes a big deal about no oil changes, but realistically that's maybe $150/year in an ICE, maybe even less. All the hysteria about lower maintenance is conveniently forgetting the massive increases in quality for the ICE cars in the last 15 years or so. Its rarely the engine or transmission that causes a maintenance visit in an ICE (why would an OEM offer up to 10 years or 100,000 miles drivetrain warranty if the engine/transmission was balky), at least in the first 5-7 years of life. If you eliminate that from an ICE, they are not really that different from an EV in terms of maintenance.

ICE are still a mess compared to way simpler and superior electrics. 90% less parts = 99.9999% better reliability simply because so much less intertwinned components can fail.

Say your air filter clogs... it makes the engine burn more crappy and ultimately accelerates wear and tear, or if the ignition is off a bit you can screw up your cylinders.

ICE cars are engineered for 200k tops... electrics can last millions of miles and decades.

 

[Jeffj]

electrics can last millions of miles and decades

Nice in theory. We have zero practical experience to back this up.

There is no question an EV is simpler, and that almost assuredly means lower maintenance. But that really only applies to the power train (engine/transmission for an ICE, battery/motor for the EV). The EV might even be 95% less maintenance on that part. The other systems are in both types of vehicles.

Take cooling for example - an ICE has a radiator, fluids, hoses, pumps, etc. But an i3 has "active battery management" with fluids, pumps, hoses, fans, probably even a small radiator (not sure on that point). I frankly don't see much difference in long term maintenance on that system. Same for brakes (though brake pads will be substantially lower wear on an EV with regen). You still need a master cylinder, slave cylinder, fluids, pumps, brake lines, calipers, etc. And suspension. And electrical/computers.

The i3 is every bit as complex, and maybe even more so, than a normal ICE, the complexity is just not in the engine/transmission which should lead to lower maintenance.

And if we want to talk about battery life (

Yes, the battery is an open question but battery costs actually go down over time. I expect there to be quite a cottage industry on BEV battery replacements/upgrades in the next decade.

), lets talk about replacing the battery pack at 100K miles. Lets be optimistic an think that we'll be able to do it for $6,000 (a 50% reduction from what it likely costs today for the battery pack). @12K/year, it takes 8.3 years to cover that distance. Dividing $6,000 by 8.33 makes $720/year in "maintenance" on that battery pack.

I really think EV's are the future, and yes, maintenance will go down compared to an ICE. But I'm not going to don the rose-colored glasses and ignore the facts.

 

[I33t]

Battery life and replacement costs would be the major service cost of an electric vehicle.

Having worked in a business that used fork lift trucks for over 20 years, the reality is that even with the battery expense, the electric trucks were far more reliable, required less servicing, and lasted way longer than the fossil fuelled trucks. By the time I left, we had less than 10% gas trucks. The only reason we kept some was that they were more accommodating over rough ground, electrics needed flat surfaces.

 

[janner]

electrics can last millions of miles and decades

Nice in theory. We have zero practical experience to back this up.

There is no question an EV is simpler, and that almost assuredly means lower maintenance. But that really only applies to the power train (engine/transmission for an ICE, battery/motor for the EV). The EV might even be 95% less maintenance on that part. The other systems are in both types of vehicles.

Take cooling for example - an ICE has a radiator, fluids, hoses, pumps, etc. But an i3 has "active battery management" with fluids, pumps, hoses, fans, probably even a small radiator (not sure on that point). I frankly don't see much difference in long term maintenance on that system. Same for brakes (though brake pads will be substantially lower wear on an EV with regen). You still need a master cylinder, slave cylinder, fluids, pumps, brake lines, calipers, etc. And suspension. And electrical/computers.

The i3 is every bit as complex, and maybe even more so, than a normal ICE, the complexity is just not in the engine/transmission which should lead to lower maintenance.

And if we want to talk about battery life (

Yes, the battery is an open question but battery costs actually go down over time. I expect there to be quite a cottage industry on BEV battery replacements/upgrades in the next decade.

), lets talk about replacing the battery pack at 100K miles. Lets be optimistic an think that we'll be able to do it for $6,000 (a 50% reduction from what it likely costs today for the battery pack). @12K/year, it takes 8.3 years to cover that distance. Dividing $6,000 by 8.33 makes $720/year in "maintenance" on that battery pack.

I really think EV's are the future, and yes, maintenance will go down compared to an ICE. But I'm not going to don the rose-colored glasses and ignore the facts.

I would agree with you on the facts, however you seem to be somewhat short on facts. You've speculated as to what the battery management system is, including admitting you don't know whether there's a radiator or not, instead of finding out what it actually consists of "The air conditioning coolant is used to provide cooling of the high-voltage battery, and this fluid can also be warmed using a heat exchanger."

You've then gone on to say about replacing the battery at 100k miles (you don't know whether this will be the case) and guessed at a replacement cost (again, something you don't know) and then come out with a lifetime maintenance figure which is absolutely pure speculation.

Find some facts and use those, please, until then don't post unsupported nonsense.

 

[I33t]

Find some facts and use those, please, until then don't post unsupported nonsense.

Works both ways. What we do know is that maintenance on fossil fuel burners is constant. Not only does it cost money, it costs time. As does fuelling up the beast. An EV has very few services at very little cost, little time, and does not require going to a service station every few days and pouring yet more fuel down the drain.

Even if the costs worked out the same (which I doubt) there is a considerable time saving over the life of the vehicle from delivery and pickup for service, and hanging around service stations fuelling up.

 

[Jeffj]

Find some facts and use those, please, until then don't post unsupported nonsense.

Wow, sorry I touched a nerve.

The whole point of the post was to say that yes, I believe that maintenance will be lower (sorry - not enough history on EV's to actually know what the ratio will be, lets see in 3-5 more years when enough real-world data has been collected), but categorically stating, as others have, that EV's are "maintenance-free" is, IMHO, just silly.

The part about the battery was an example, not a statement of fact. You don't know how long the battery will last, neither do I. So I stated a couple of simple assumptions to show what the "maintenance" cost on the battery could be. None of us will actually know the cost for many years. But I am comfortable in making the point that replacing the battery (which I believe is highly likely if you want to drive the car for > 100K miles) has to be considered maintenance.

As for other maintenance issues, the i3 sure seems to have a lot of them. My speculation is that this is more due to new car introduction than any inherent flaw, but all you have to do to get some sense of the maintenance issues is read the Facebook group or read this forum.

I've been lucky, maybe even in the majority, in that my i3 has had 1 issue only (a CEL) that was addressed with a software update that I voluntarily decided to have applied. 8 months and 8,000 miles and it has only been in for service that one time. But that's not remarkable for any new car, EV or ICE after only 8 months.

 

[epirali]

I just don't understand why most discussions here want to devolve into personal attacks, like use of words like "nonsense." I mean if one poster says "ICE cars are engineered for 200k tops... electrics can last millions of miles and decades" no one bats an eyelash. To say something reasonable like we do not know the longevity of an i3 battery, when all early owners of a Leaf discovered how far off Nissan was on its guesses, seems to invite attack.

The i3 is much more complex then a Leaf, mainly because of its BMS. This should help with battery longevity, but it is additional complexity and parts. And the i3 by design is using parts that are less common that other cars. This is an advantage in performance, but should prove to be a big disadvantage in repair costs. We have already seen this from other posters about something as simple as a windshield repair.

Part of my observation about the i3 was this: it is a technologically more complex car than a Nissan Leaf, yet in real life range it doesn't gain anything. Ignoring the fact that it may be more fun, better drive, better interior, etc, I would believe that the i3 will incur higher maintenance costs when the all inclusive warranty ends.

So if someone is looking to BEVs to minimize running costs (including long term maintenance) they are better off with the simple Nissan Leaf. Well, that is until they end up having to replace badly degraded battery for $5000-6000 dollars in 100K or so.

 

[janner]

I just don't understand why most discussions here want to devolve into personal attacks, like use of words like "nonsense." I mean if one poster says "ICE cars are engineered for 200k tops... electrics can last millions of miles and decades" no one bats an eyelash. To say something reasonable like we do not know the longevity of an i3 battery, when all early owners of a Leaf discovered how far off Nissan was on its guesses, seems to invite attack.

The i3 is much more complex then a Leaf, mainly because of its BMS. This should help with battery longevity, but it is additional complexity and parts. And the i3 by design is using parts that are less common that other cars. This is an advantage in performance, but should prove to be a big disadvantage in repair costs. We have already seen this from other posters about something as simple as a windshield repair.

Part of my observation about the i3 was this: it is a technologically more complex car than a Nissan Leaf, yet in real life range it doesn't gain anything. Ignoring the fact that it may be more fun, better drive, better interior, etc, I would believe that the i3 will incur higher maintenance costs when the all inclusive warranty ends.

So if someone is looking to BEVs to minimize running costs (including long term maintenance) they are better off with the simple Nissan Leaf. Well, that is until they end up having to replace badly degraded battery for $5000-6000 dollars in 100K or so.

I would believe that the i3 --- But the question is why you would believe that. My nonsense comment was made because making a comment just based on a view that doesn't seem to have any basis in reality is probably just that, nonsense. So please provide some kind of reason as to why you 'would believe it of an i3' otherwise you just invite the 'nonsense' comments, although I suspect you've already noticed that.

So if someone is looking to BEVs to minimize running costs (including long term maintenance) they are better off with the simple Nissan Leaf. Maybe, maybe not, but it would be good to hear from you what leads you to think that.

Well, that is until they end up having to replace badly degraded battery for $5000-6000 dollars in 100K or so. Every blog on every national newspaper has the same old urban myths about battery life. Is there some evidence or reference that supports your view on battery life?

 

[janner]

Find some facts and use those, please, until then don't post unsupported nonsense.

Wow, sorry I touched a nerve.

The whole point of the post was to say that yes, I believe that maintenance will be lower (sorry - not enough history on EV's to actually know what the ratio will be, lets see in 3-5 more years when enough real-world data has been collected), but categorically stating, as others have, that EV's are "maintenance-free" is, IMHO, just silly.

The part about the battery was an example, not a statement of fact. You don't know how long the battery will last, neither do I. So I stated a couple of simple assumptions to show what the "maintenance" cost on the battery could be. None of us will actually know the cost for many years. But I am comfortable in making the point that replacing the battery (which I believe is highly likely if you want to drive the car for > 100K miles) has to be considered maintenance.

As for other maintenance issues, the i3 sure seems to have a lot of them. My speculation is that this is more due to new car introduction than any inherent flaw, but all you have to do to get some sense of the maintenance issues is read the Facebook group or read this forum.

I've been lucky, maybe even in the majority, in that my i3 has had 1 issue only (a CEL) that was addressed with a software update that I voluntarily decided to have applied. 8 months and 8,000 miles and it has only been in for service that one time. But that's not remarkable for any new car, EV or ICE after only 8 months.

Yes, touched a nerve. Every blog is populated with people throwing FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) and they do it by saying that they 'believe' something to be true. Some people are taken in by this and some aren't. There is certainly a place on an owners forum like this for shared experiences and actual information. I guess I'm of the view that we could do without the FUD.

 

[drb]

No maintenance issues here and when I need something, my dealership is right on top of it. Just had my one-year service and got my i3 back the same day as I brought it to the dealership plus a loaner car as always to get me around while my vehicle was being serviced. What I like most about the i3 and there are a lot to things to like is its convenience. I have a "gas station" in my garage which charges the battery around midnight when electric rates are at their lowest and the vehicle is ready to go for me in the morning. I have the REx so no range anxiety as my driving typically does not require more than 120 miles at a time twice a week. All other driving is local.

 

[Jeffj]

As for the original post, I've been keeping pretty accurate records since purchase, and my monthly operating costs are tracking to 3.1 cents/mile after 7800 miles (94% electric).

 

[epirali]

I just don't understand why most discussions here want to devolve into personal attacks, like use of words like "nonsense." I mean if one poster says "ICE cars are engineered for 200k tops... electrics can last millions of miles and decades" no one bats an eyelash. To say something reasonable like we do not know the longevity of an i3 battery, when all early owners of a Leaf discovered how far off Nissan was on its guesses, seems to invite attack.

The i3 is much more complex then a Leaf, mainly because of its BMS. This should help with battery longevity, but it is additional complexity and parts. And the i3 by design is using parts that are less common that other cars. This is an advantage in performance, but should prove to be a big disadvantage in repair costs. We have already seen this from other posters about something as simple as a windshield repair.

Part of my observation about the i3 was this: it is a technologically more complex car than a Nissan Leaf, yet in real life range it doesn't gain anything. Ignoring the fact that it may be more fun, better drive, better interior, etc, I would believe that the i3 will incur higher maintenance costs when the all inclusive warranty ends.

So if someone is looking to BEVs to minimize running costs (including long term maintenance) they are better off with the simple Nissan Leaf. Well, that is until they end up having to replace badly degraded battery for $5000-6000 dollars in 100K or so.

I would believe that the i3 --- But the question is why you would believe that. My nonsense comment was made because making a comment just based on a view that doesn't seem to have any basis in reality is probably just that, nonsense. So please provide some kind of reason as to why you 'would believe it of an i3' otherwise you just invite the 'nonsense' comments, although I suspect you've already noticed that.

So if someone is looking to BEVs to minimize running costs (including long term maintenance) they are better off with the simple Nissan Leaf. Maybe, maybe not, but it would be good to hear from you what leads you to think that.

Well, that is until they end up having to replace badly degraded battery for $5000-6000 dollars in 100K or so. Every blog on every national newspaper has the same old urban myths about battery life. Is there some evidence or reference that supports your view on battery life?

Yes please go check out the Nissan Leaf forums. Many early adopters in hot climates have lost a lot of capacity because Nissan chose a particular chemistry and underestimated heat impact in hotter climates for a passive air cooled battery. Some owners are starting to hit 50% of original capacity. There have been lawsuits and settlements, it's very easy to look up. That's why I said the Leaf, which has much simpler battery cooling, should be cheaper in maintenance. Until the battery needs to be replaced. The price has already been announced by Nissan for out of warranty replacement.

http://www.electricvehiclewiki.com/Real_World_Battery_Capacity_Loss

By contrast Teslas with active cooling show much much less capacity loss. There are data points for original Roadster that show 80+ % capacity at around 100K. The owners on those forums have been collecting data. Mine also showed very little loss by age.

No one knows about the i3, there is not enough data. It is active temperature control, not sure if it's as aggressive as Teslas. So it should do much better than the Leaf, but not enough data yet. But all LiIon battery technology shows degradation by cycles and age. It's minimized by reducing high and low charge states, that is why Tesla only uses from 15 to 85 percent of the capacity in range mode. The Leaf and i3 use a larger range of the capacity, but don't go near 0 or 100 for longevity.

The leaf has much less technology than the i3, so common sense says there is less potential parts failure. It's safe get the more complex a design, the more incidental failure.

 

[I33t]

On the other hand, battery temp management will extend the life of the most expensive component in the vehicle.

Leaf has a 24kWh battery and has a usable 21.3kWh, so 88.75% usable.

The i3 has a 22kWh battery and has a usable 18.8kWh, so 85.45%

The Tesla,

depends on use. If you use 'Range mode', on an 85kWh it's using 76kWh, so 89.41%; more than the i3 and even slightly more than the Leaf.

If you use 'normal', it's using 67.5kWh, so 79.41%; less than both of the others.

It's pretty clear why the Leaf is suffering in it's battery. No active thermal management, and the choice of highest usable capacity of the three. Glad I cancelled mine.

epirali, I can't find where the Tesla uses 15-85 in Range mode, do you have a link?

Also, despite the conjecture about the i3's active cooling reliability, it sounds more efficient and safer than the liquid cooling on the Tesla. I guess time will tell.