[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by kevinc

if such a thing actually exists, i can assure you it isn’t french.

🤣🤣🤣

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by KevinC

If such a thing actually exists, I can assure you it isn’t French.

It used to be the original Renault 5 womens shopping car but hardly any around now.

[Ugly Kar]

Originally Posted by kyriian

180 ft/lbs torque is the critical part here, for a supermini, meant for in-town use and zipping in and out of tight quarters, that is more than adequate for its built purpose.

And since when is being a driving enthusiast all about 600+horsepowers? When you can use barely 1/6th of it on the road without the red and blue chasing after you.

Since when do BMW enthusiasts care about adequate for built purpose?? The fact that M cars now account for over 10% of BMW sales should tell you all you need to know about BMW owners. Even a lot of non-M owners take their cars to the track. We want to drive something exciting.

And if you want a 2nd car for a grocery getter, or just a city commuter, a hybrid is still a better option than an EV as many people don't have a place to charge, and there's no range anxiety. They're also more reasonably priced.

[eugenebmw]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

You make good points, and I've never understood why EV need sub 4-second 0 - 60 times to legitimize their existence. And even at the beginning. The idea of EV is to concerve energy and pollute less. All these super-fast EV are antithetical to the message and the environmental meme.

GM already made this EV. The Bolt siblings were rationally powered, rationally ranged, rationally sized, reasonably sculpted, and reasonably priced. Apparently they didn't sell in volume to be profitable. Ford says its Skunkworks EV is going to be smaller and affordable, I just have to question if it will sell. The Bolt(s) didn't. One deterrent of the Bolt was it recharged slowly at DCFC. Go on any EV forum and you'll find charging speed, and range of over 200 miles are immaterial to ownership. All EV owners say recharging overnight and waking up with a full battery is bliss, yet the owners all say they use the car daily well UNDER the range limits, so it's no big deal. So why didn't the Bolt sell?

I think most of the US market wants 400 miles with a DCFC recharge in 5 minutes. EV are never going to hit those metrics.

When I was in my twenty and thirty, lucky I never owned a car in sub 4 second 0 to 60 like today. Otherwise I may not here today and enjoying my life

[XutvJet]

Originally Posted by Efthreeoh

You make good points, and I've never understood why EV need sub 4-second 0 - 60 times to legitimize their existence. And even at the beginning. The idea of EV is to concerve energy and pollute less. All these super-fast EV are antithetical to the message and the environmental meme.

GM already made this EV. The Bolt siblings were rationally powered, rationally ranged, rationally sized, reasonably sculpted, and reasonably priced. Apparently they didn't sell in volume to be profitable. Ford says its Skunkworks EV is going to be smaller and affordable, I just have to question if it will sell. The Bolt(s) didn't. One deterrent of the Bolt was it recharged slowly at DCFC. Go on any EV forum and you'll find charging speed, and range of over 200 miles are immaterial to ownership. All EV owners say recharging overnight and waking up with a full battery is bliss, yet the owners all say they use the car daily well UNDER the range limits, so it's no big deal. So why didn't the Bolt sell?

I think most of the US market wants 400 miles with a DCFC recharge in 5 minutes. EV are never going to hit those metrics.

I think the main problem with EVs, especially the Bolt, was the weird looks. Automakers needed to get away from making EVs look futuristic, but in a bad way. The other issue with EVs was their complexity. There is absolutely no reason to make an EV complex, remove basic and common controls (I'm looking at you Elon Musk), and overly tech heavy. Most people don't want that. The styling needs to be more mainstream as well as the tech. The automakers seem to be coming around to this now.

The majority of the buying public doesn't want or need a car that does sub 6 second 0-60s. We all do, obviously, but most people are very content with a car/truck/SUV that does 0-60 in the mid 6s to upper 7s. Most current expensive EVs would certainly be lighter and more eco friendly if they didn't have AWD, two big and powerful motors, and a huge powerpack to feed the need for 500hp+. It's unnecessary and as you pointed out, goes against the whole point of an EV.

Imagine how many Civics Honda could sell if they made an EV Civic that looks like the current gen Civic and sold it for under $30K and had a range of 250-300 miles and a 0-60 of 8 seconds (just like the current standard Civic).

[TargaM2]

Like ALL Renaultsport products i expect the Alpine version to be impressive.

[Efthreeoh]

Originally Posted by XutvJet

I think the main problem with EVs, especially the Bolt, was the weird looks. Automakers needed to get away from making EVs look futuristic, but in a bad way. The other issue with EVs was their complexity. There is absolutely no reason to make an EV complex, remove basic and common controls (I'm looking at you Elon Musk), and overly tech heavy. Most people don't want that. The styling needs to be more mainstream as well as the tech. The automakers seem to be coming around to this now.

The majority of the buying public doesn't want or need a car that does sub 6 second 0-60s. We all do, obviously, but most people are very content with a car/truck/SUV that does 0-60 in the mid 6s to upper 7s. Most current expensive EVs would certainly be lighter and more eco friendly if they didn't have AWD, two big and powerful motors, and a huge powerpack to feed the need for 500hp+. It's unnecessary and as you pointed out, goes against the whole point of an EV.

Imagine how many Civics Honda could sell if they made an EV Civic that looks like the current gen Civic and sold it for under $30K and had a range of 250-300 miles and a 0-60 of 8 seconds (just like the current standard Civic).

I didn't think the Bolt was that far off in design; I found it attractive enough. I looked at the original Bolt when I was considering an EV for my 170-mile daily round trip. The interior was ugly (materials mostly) and the drivers seat was not comfortable at all. I think LG and GM Korea had too much design influence; one thing GM does is make great seats. Those two things kept me from buying one, on top of the real winter range it would have. It left no room for extracurricular driving if I needed it.

But again, it was not expensive and had 200+ mile EPA rating. Maybe the battery fire recall killed it. But like in M5Rick's EV thread, real EV'ers insist battery fires are a non-issue. To your point, the Renault is making headway in normal-looking design. Maybe there is hope...

[RM7]

Originally Posted by Ugly Kar

Since when do BMW enthusiasts care about adequate for built purpose?? The fact that M cars now account for over 10% of BMW sales should tell you all you need to know about BMW owners.

Does that number include SUVs?

[brianeck]

Originally Posted by RM7

Does that number include SUVs?

Yup. And m light cars 1.0 and 2.0. When you stick more m's on cars that are perfectly great but don't really deserve it, of course the % rate goes up. I love my g20 340i, and it's bm3 and zhp tuned, but it's still a 340. I came from an f80 6mt. . . I have no qualms about calling it what it is.

I did light up an f82 the other day, which was funny. . . But I have awd and snow tires and will still admit I'm in a baby m lite car all day.