That's fine w/ me....then maybe we can move away from coal and nail cleaner ways to generate electricity!!!

 

Matt,

Not to hijack my own thread but is it safe to assume you put a fair amount of money down on your car? I don't mean to be nosey, I'm just curious how you bought a clubman for 60 months for only 320 a month if you don't mind.

A trade-in possibly?

Thanks,

Mark

 

Am I the only one here that would say, yes I am going to be applying for the MINI E 1 year lease?

 

but five years with about $2500 down on a $22.6k car.... some other misc fees upped the purchase a bit.... The key is to buy a very base car.

Matt

 

I'm going to apply, but my chances are probably nil because I live in Northern California. I planned to apply as soon as I heard, a few months ago, that MINI was going to be making e-MINI's available in California. I've driven electric cars before -- I had a chance to drive the EV-1 for a week, and I had the use of a Honda EV-Plus for a while as I was waiting for my MINI to be delivered -- so I'm pretty familiar with their limitations. I also know all about their advantages, such as that smoooth acceleration and incredible torque!

I was terribly disappointed when I got the e-mail from MINI indicating that they would be restricting leases to Southern California and the NY/NJ area. I suspect the limited distribution is because they only plan to have a few people trained to service the e-MINI, and they want to make sure all the leasees are all within shouting distance of a trained technician. Or at least within a single charge's range But... the limited distribution and (presumably) trained mechanics also makes me worried that MINI is just fulfilling a regulatory requirement, and isn't really making a long-term commitment to this technology.

I love my MINI, but I'm also anxious to move on to a cleaner technology, whether it's an all-electric car or a plug-in hybrid.

And orangecrush, I trust you've seen the error of your original post. California is the only state that has the authority to establish new vehicle emission standards different from U.S. EPA's. We have that authority because we had emission standard before Congress gave U.S. EPA similar authority and because we need it -- about 20 million Californians still live in areas with air pollution severe enough to cause health problems. However, several states have piggy-backed onto California's standards because they also need cleaner cars to keep their cities liveable. As Gocart so eloquently stated, California's regulations played a major role in propelling the auto industry into the future. I think you could argue that catalytic converters and fuel injection systems were both introduced into mass production because of California's auto emission standards.

End of lecture.

Gimme my e-MINI!

 

I want the MINI E. I live in So Cal, too.

I'm very excited about this car. I think it's perfect runabout for someone like me with a 25 minute commute. I'll never be worried about running out of juice.

 

Considering there are no back seats, that eliminates me and my 4 year old son. I just looked at the pix, I thought the early press releases stated it was based on the first gen Cooper, but the most recent pix show an R56.

Back to dreaming about my Venture One which is due around the same time for less money and a lot more fun..plus as a tandem two seater has an option for a child seat, necessary for people like me.

 

I have seen the error of my ways...

Seriously, it was one of those comments that I thought that particular idea was stupid and I carelessly labeled anyone that lived in CA as the same.

It was ignorant on my part and I did and do apologize to any I may have offended.

Mark

 

That's a gracious thing to say orangecrush. Thanks.

 

Not a problem at all. I NEVER meant to offend my fellow mini owners. I have too much respect for them and I should have thought before I typed.

I still think the car is not ready to hit the market yet (still in it's enfancy stage) but calling fellow members stupid (which is basically what I did) because I don't like an idea was in itself, stupid and rude.

Again, my apologies to my fellow mini owners. Poor judgement on my part.

Mark

 

Don't worry, Mark. I know you didn't mean to imply that all Californians are stupid! Your labeling was obviously limited to those of us who work in California's air pollution control program! In which case, I for one took no offense. I've been called much worse "in the line of duty."

 

 

I got some of the numbers wrong....

Total cash price $22,777.50
Down Payment $2500
total Financed $20,277.50
Interest rate a bit less than 5%
60 months, $383 (and some change) per month.

Total interest over loan $2684.50
Total time payments $25,462

Really with inflation somewhere between 2%-4%, it's close to a free loan!

Sorry it's off topic, but I figured I'd just include it for accuracy.

Matt

 

That's cool.... like I said, I didn't mean to be nosey, I was just curious. I wish my payments were that low.

Mark

 

but it really comes down the mission. This purchase was meant to be a bare bones replacement for the 2001 MDX my wife was using to drive to and from work. Insurance went up about $30 a month as well..... With the gas savings we worked out that it was a pretty cheap way to move up to a new car.

Matt

 

I am all for new forms of transportation. I just wonder why BMW/MINI is doing this. Are they going to stay in the electric car business for good? Is this for advertising purposes to sell more gasoline MINIs? Are they getting some type of tax break from the feds? What are they going to do with these cars after 1 year?

The reason I wonder this is if you think about the numbers they don't add up. At the very least I would think it costs at least $30,000 a car to build these. 30k each X 500 cars = $15 million. The sum of 490 cars X 1 year = just under 5 million. BMW is $10 million in the hole after 1 year. Of course the cars are worth something after 1 year.

This is what I think of. What's in it for BMW? Being green and all that crap like so many companies claim to be now is one thing but the bottom line to any company is profit.

 

Actually, after a year, BMW is probably going to tear apart the cars for testing and destroy them anyway, so they're probably out the whole $10 million, whether the cars are still worth anything or not.

But, $10 million is small change when viewed in the larger context of all the research/development/testing costs involved with bringing a new car to market. I don't think BMW is worried too much about profitability on these first 500 cars - they're just one more line item in the R&D budget.

 

I agree, $10 million is a drop in a bucket for a company like that... not to mention I'm sure it's a write off tax-wise as research for experimental purposes from the gov't.

Besides, I would think from BMW that $10 million is a cheap way to gauge whether it will sell in the US. They probably spend more than that in advertising...

Mark

 

10 million is a drop in the bucket for most auto companies but not for MINI. MINI has 0.7% market share of all the autos sold in the US. If Honda did this I would say it's a drop in the bucket. MINI sells around 50,000 cars in the US a year while Honda sells that many Civics in a month.

I guess we will find out eventually.

 

MINI is part of the BMW group (MINI, BMW, Rolls-Royce), and all three brands share the same worldwide Research & Development network. As such, it doesn't really matter how big or small MINI itself is, or what their U.S. sales are.

Looking at BMW Group's last annual report, their total R&D budget was right at 3 billion euros (4 billion U.S. dollars).

So, a $10 million expense represents about one-quarter of one percent of BMW Group's annual R&D budget - just another line item.

 

Perhaps but most corporations are not run that way. Usually each company under the parent corporate company has its own R&D budget. At least that is how it is for the company I work for.

 

And I'm sure each subgroup under the BMW group does have its own budget, but it all comes out of the same pot at the end of the year. That's why the annual report doesn't separate the numbers for the three subgroups.

It's probably a good thing, too, since the MINI numbers are helping to offset the double-digit declines in the other subgroups.

 

Has anyone ever seen any info on how big a gas generator it would take to tow behind a car (i.e. a MINI) so that you could drive cross country? If it wouldn't take too big a generator, then one of the MINI Do More little trailers could probably handle it and allow a normal commuter MINi to go anywhere. Or would this be a totally ridiculous idea?

 

and probably wouldn't be happening without it. Under the program, auto manufacturers have to make serious progress in reduction of light vehicle emissions or they can't see in the state. While the program has morphed over time, it's still in effect in some form. But when I tried to get to it at www.arb.ca.gov the sites weren't coming up... So $10M to keep selling in CA is chump change... And who knows, some good tech may actually come out of it!

Matt

 

Rev,

Not a silly idea at all. Take a look at this link:

http://www.evdl.org/archive/index.ht...ble-td19696647

Way back when, a few car companies (and third party ones) used to convert regular cars to ev. For extended range, a tow behind generator was suggested and tried. Seems like the overall gas mileage isn't too bad, definitely not better than the uncoverted engine. But hey, we're talking one or two trips a year, and most of the pollution will be along the highways, not in crowded urban areas... not ideal, but better than nothing.

As to how big a generator, the rule of thumb is 30% loss from the generator to the electric motor (counting the charging losses in the battery). The watt energy equivalent I think is 746 watts per horsepower. Soo, depending you your power demand (say, average 40hp to cruise, 80hp to pass), you would need 30-60 Kw + 30%, which makes it about 40-80 Kw.

Hmm, somewhere my math went wrong I think. I looked up mobile generators in that range and they weigh a ton (literally) and cost a small fortune. Can anyone spot where I went wrong? I suppose you can operate at a net power loss and use a smaller generator.