[lnsru]

Very detailed writing, thank you! But this “Costs for maintenance totalled £3056.0” is shocking! It’s a golden car! Ok, it has internal combustion engine too, but 100€ maintenance monthly is shocking. 8 tires for 45000 km is also shocking. I am driving almost double that with one set (except nasty flats). Are other electric cars cheaper to drive?

[roel_v]

Shrug Why would that be high? It seems to include the required yearly checkup, and a 450L brake change that wasn't necessary. My (diesel) BMW X3 cost a little bit more than his car to buy, and I expect to average the same maintenance costs over say 5 years (his car was second hand when he bought it, too). BMW official dealerships are quite expensive, what you get for it are exact quotes within minutes on the phone, reliable planning and always new, OEM parts. Whether that's worth the money is for everyone to decide for themselves, but I don't think this is 'golden car' territory by a long shot.

[ac29]

Perhaps its not expensive for a BMW, but I've spent well under $1000 over ~4 years on maintaining my car in the US, including all manufacturer suggested maintenance and a new set of 4 tires. That's retail cost - I did none of the work myself.

[bumby]

Also keep in mind that BMWs are notoriously expensive on maintenance compared to many other cars.[0] Around where I live, it's easy to find some relatively inexpensive used BMWs when people want to unload them due to high maintenance costs.

[0] https://www.consumerreports.org/car-maintenance/the-cost-of-...

[avar]

The article we're discussing is talking about BMW in the UK. Your link is to US-based consumer reports.

I wouldn't trust anything about BMW or other premium German brands from a US source as an EU customer, because:

1) US (and Canadian, Australian, Malaysian) fuel is of much lower quality, and BMW engines are notoriously sensitive to this. As an example, the BMW I own wasn't ever sold in North America or these other markets because of the high sulfur content in the fuel.

2) US consumers who buy BMW are going to have a selection bias towards people buying muscle cars. You're not just looking at reliability numbers, but numbers skewed by Americans who'd buy a foreign luxury vehicle with a powerful engine.

3) BMW is fickle about its maintenance requirements, and generally the further you get away from Germany the worse your quality of maintenance and ability to source genuine parts easily is going to be.

BMW is still pretty bad when it comes to total cost of ownership, but this German study of vehicles on EU roads shows it isn't quite that bad: https://europe.jdpower.com/de/press-releases/2019-germany-ve...

[ac29]

> US (and Canadian, Australian, Malaysian) fuel is of much lower quality, and BMW engines are notoriously sensitive to this. As an example, the BMW I own wasn't ever sold in North America or these other markets because of the high sulfur content in the fuel.

This hasnt been true in a long time, at least with regards to sulfur. Current US regulations limit sulfur to 15 ppm [0], EU limits to 10 ppm [1]. Compared to the 1990s and earlier, when it could be as much as several thousand ppm in both the US and Europe, sulfur has been nearly eliminated in current diesel fuels (for road use, at least).

[0] https://www.epa.gov/diesel-fuel-standards/diesel-fuel-standa...

[1] https://www.transportpolicy.net/standard/eu-fuels-diesel-and...

[avar]

Interesting, I didn't know that. Your first link pertains to diesel, as far as I can tell the EPA instituted the 10 ppm limit for gasoline in 2017

The limit was 50 ppm and 10 ppm in the EU in 2005 and 2009, respectively according to your [1].

I've got an N53 engine[1] which was introduced in 2006. This[1] page shows it and a few other BMW engines weren't sold in North America for fuel quality reasons.

As far as comparing long-term reliability numbers it amounts to the same thing. US numbers can't be trusted for EU consumers. We've got 10 years of data at 10 ppm, the US just 2 years.

But the main reason I'd distrust it is consumer bias. As shown in [2][3] BMW is as common in Germany as Nissan and Honda in the US. I live in The Netherlands where it's about as common to see a BMW (5% market share, 2% in the US).

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_in_the_United_States#Engin...

2. http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2019/01/u-s-auto-sales-brand-ra...

3. https://www.best-selling-cars.com/germany/2019-q1-germany-be...

[geerlingguy]

He mentioned the tires are a very specific size only really available from one source, and that they are narrower than a typical tire. I’m guessing that means reduced tread life, and not having options means it’s probably harder to find the perfect tire for your climate and region to optimize longevity.

I agree, though; I can usually get the same range out of one set of tires.

[peterwwillis]

You don't have to stick to the OEM tire. You can get a different, cheaper size, as long as it doesn't rub the wheel well or bottom out. And the exact tire and manufacturer you get, along with the conditions it was kept in, will determine the wear life of the tire. And when people complain about their tires wearing fast, it's often just badly aligned tires that could be fixed by going to a better mechanic. And buying tires online or from a warehouse is always cheaper, often by a lot.

So just because you have a certain kind of car doesn't mean you will always have the same tire wear or cost.

[gambiting]

>>You can get a different, cheaper size, as long as it doesn't rub the wheel well or bottom out.

In the UK you have to tell your insurer if you do that and it can impact your insurance significantly in some cases. The best one I could find was with Aviva they allow 10mm variation in width of the tyre from the manufacturer spec, so if the original size was 225/45 you could buy 235/45 or 215/45, but anything beyond that would require you telling them and have an impact on your premium. Chaging the rims to a different size always requires telling the insurer, even if they are the manufacturer's original rims(which is incredibly dumb, I bought my car with factory 20" wheels, I bought an original set of wheels directly from the dealership in 19" size but I still have to tell my insurer because it's a "modification" to the factory spec of the vehicle).

[peterwwillis]

Why would you tell your insurer? They don't go around checking tire widths, afaik

[gambiting]

Because if you have an accident and they find out you had tyres/rims different from stock they will absolutely either refuse to pay out the claim or reduce it significantly. Especially if you put on tyres of a different size than that approved by the manfucaturer, they can very easily say that a tyre that is too narrow/too wide affects how the car handles and it would have contributed to the accident.

[peterwwillis]

And then you take it to court, and you get a mechanical engineer and a racing instructor to say that a 215/45R60 is not going to cause an accident that a 205/45R60 wouldn't have caused, since tread wear, hardness, speed rating, structural design, and road conditions all are the most important factors in traction. Identical tires with a 10mm width difference will perform nearly identically, but the same size tire using different manufacturing processes will result in completely different traction. Tires of the same size rating but different manufacture can have comparatively narrower or wider (due to sidewall stiffness) or flatter or bulging (tread patterns) geometries.

But my bet is it's more a matter of following a contract than whether it actually caused an issue; either way I can see not wanting to deal with the potential hassle.

[bluGill]

BMW is known to specify weird size tires where nothing else will fit in the space allowed. I don't know about this car, but in general I would expect that you have a limited choice in tires.

[archi42]

400 of that was for the brake replacement, and the remaining 2600 sound pretty normal these days (if you're going to a manufacturer contracted garage instead of some 3rd party garage). Remember there is still an ICE for range extension, and the inspection checklists probably doesn't care whether you used the ICE virtually never or all the time.

As for tires, my hybrid seems better and also takes pretty much any manufacturers tires (19/235 summer, 17/235 winter - can't say anything detailed about durability regarding my driving since I only have it since April this year, but the previous owner seemed to make about 40000km per set), but the i3 tires seem to be purpose build, so less quantity (more expensive) and MAYBE focused much more on efficiency over durability.

Also 45k miles, not km? (Link is down now, so can't check).

(some editing)

[lnsru]

Sadly km or ~900 miles per month.

Engine inside is small one from motorcycle, so it shouldn’t be hard to service. I was considering buying i3, but went for 328i.

[bluGill]

Small engines generally need more service than larger ones. This is mostly because large engines are not pushed as hard relative to the size because the buyers want a reliable engine.

A tractor with a 600 horsepower engine would have around 19 liters. GM can get the same 600 horsepower out of 6 liters. I know motorcycle mechanics who can get that power from 1.5 liters. Of course the motorcycle mechanic will tell you upfront that you will have to completely rebuild the engine every 40 hours. GM knows that even though the engine can deliver 600 horsepower it will only do that for a few seconds and then have plenty of rest time at much lower power output to cool off as a result they can get several thousand miles. Tractor manufactures know that their customers will use 600 horsepower continuously all day, everyday with no breaks to cool down so they build for that spec.

Point is I expect the engine in this car is designed to not be as reliable because of the weight/size vs reliability trade offs they can make. It you mostly use the car in electric mode with a few long trips it won't matter overall. If you typically take long trips (without stopping to recharge) get a car with a larger engine.

[thrill]

This engine is run at one of two steady RPMs and is derated in HP from its already reliable historical use on another BMW vehicle.

[tibbon]

While motorcycles and cars aren't the same; I've found tires for them are really expensive. I can get about 3000-10000 miles on a set, and the sets are $450 installed. There's cheaper tires out there, but good tires are a safety feature on them really and make a huge difference.

I always bought really cheap tires on my really cheap clunker cars and never knew the difference. I wonder if it's just volume of cheaper tires, or if expensive rubber is just more expensive?

[NeedMoreTea]

Motorcycle BHP per tonne, and tyre contact patch explain most of a back tyre's life. The contact patch and lean alone for the front. Counter steering has to be rougher on tyre life.

Buy a 400BHP+ Ferrari or 911 and you can get car tyre life right down to similar levels. They'll now be $300-$500+ a corner for being super wide, super low profile, sticky things. $2,000 in tyres every service... A sporty V8 of a couple of decades ago could easily give 6k miles front, 3k back. With higher powers now, who knows.

If you could get really cheap clunker type rubber for those cars, you'd probably be just a few miles from wrapping it round a lamp post. First time you press the loud pedal with enthusiasm most likely. :)

[bumby]

In addition to the economy of mass production on car tires, motorcycle tires are engineered differently. For example, they are generally higher performance tires with a different contact footprint because the handling dynamics of a motorcycle mean a tire 'leans' into a turn.

Similarly, heavy duty truck tires are more expensive as they have more engineering requirements.

[stanski]

I think it's just volume. But yeah it's a pain - they go relatively quick and they cost a ton. It's hard to skimp on safety though, especially if you don't only ride on dry and warm days.

[kozak]

i3 tire are notoriously expensive. People call them "bicycle tires" as they are large in diameter and very narrow, and they also have different sizes back and front.

[MrQuincle]

Last week I read that significant plastic is released in nature by tire wear. Electric cars are often heavier then their gasoline equivalents. I wouldn't be surprised if they wear faster and pollute more microplastics.

[1] https://friendsoftheearth.uk/plastics/tyres-and-microplastic...

[MrQuincle]

This I read by the way from the book "The hidden impact". There's a digital version in English on the website https://babetteporcelijn.com/en/. It has a lot of data that tries to help people to make sustainable impact that matters.

Note that I'm not against electric cars at all. I'm only talking about pollution of microplastics. Not pollution in general.

Of course it's hard to tell if people downvote because they disagree with me or because there are actually falsehoods in my comment. If it's the latter it's either: 1) electric cars are not heavier, or 2) tire wear due to additional weight is neglectable. Please, correct me if I'm wrong. Perhaps it's my filter bubble, but I only find articles that support my statement [2]. I quote:

"For energy use, the weight is less of a problem than for gasoline cars. They waste the increased energy used to accelerate the higher weight. But the momentum of an electric car lets you return energy to the battery as the car slows. The heavier the car, the more energy it takes to accelerate—but the more you return to the battery commensurately through regenerative braking.

Of course, if you pay six figures for a high-performance electric car (think Tesla Model S P100D) and use its capabilities, you should expect to replace your very expensive low-profile tires every 15,000 miles or so. That's par for the segment."

[2] https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1122838_busting-7-of-th...