MINI E Talk (2010) Discussion of the electric, zero-emissions field trial MINI. Only 500 to be leased by MINIUSA!

So was it worth it? E-mini....

Old May 16, 2010 | 05:33 PM
  #1  
orangecrush's Avatar
orangecrush
Thread Starter
|
6th Gear
iTrader: (37)
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,782
Likes: 1
From: Charlotte, NC.
So was it worth it? E-mini....

Just curious for those of you that have the e-mini and had a gas mini before, do you still like it?

I know the electrical hookup was a pain for many but now that ya'll have had a chance to drive it, what's your thoughts?

Does it go far enough between charges?

Do you find yourself running low on a charge with no place to plug in or are there places around town that cater to electric cars/minis?

I'm assuming that the cars are quick with enough torque to make them fun but has anyone taken one to the track for fun?

Just curious to what everyone's thoughts are now that they've had time to really drive them.

Thanks,

Mark
 
Reply
Old May 18, 2010 | 04:34 PM
  #2  
thevelourfog's Avatar
thevelourfog
5th Gear
iTrader: (2)
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1,053
Likes: 0
From: Afghanistan or Seattle
Mark, did you see this on motoringfile?

http://www.motoringfile.com/2010/05/...urgring-video/

I'm not sure what the ring times are for a JCW or stock S...
 
Reply
Old May 18, 2010 | 05:02 PM
  #3  
orangecrush's Avatar
orangecrush
Thread Starter
|
6th Gear
iTrader: (37)
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,782
Likes: 1
From: Charlotte, NC.
Wow, pretty impressive for an electric car. It's about a minute slower than a JCW but nonetheless impressive for an emission free car.

I was wondering if the e-mini lived up to the hope and hype when it first came out.

Thanks,

Mark
 
Reply
Old Jul 13, 2010 | 05:31 AM
  #4  
moondawg14's Avatar
moondawg14
2nd Gear
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by orangecrush
Wow, pretty impressive for an electric car. It's about a minute slower than a JCW but nonetheless impressive for an emission free car.

I was wondering if the e-mini lived up to the hope and hype when it first came out.

Thanks,

Mark
"Emission Relocated" ... but otherwise I agree!
 
Reply
Old Aug 20, 2010 | 08:53 PM
  #5  
Minihockey's Avatar
Minihockey
1st Gear
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by moondawg14
"Emission Relocated" ... but otherwise I agree!

I love that!
Where do people think the power from that little plug comes from? Some big ugly coal burning monster energy plant.
 
Reply
Old Aug 21, 2010 | 05:44 AM
  #6  
orangecrush's Avatar
orangecrush
Thread Starter
|
6th Gear
iTrader: (37)
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,782
Likes: 1
From: Charlotte, NC.
Originally Posted by Minihockey
I love that!
Where do people think the power from that little plug comes from? Some big ugly coal burning monster energy plant.

"emission free" was meant in relation to how much emissions a gas powered car produces.

 
Reply
Old Aug 21, 2010 | 06:48 AM
  #7  
Minihockey's Avatar
Minihockey
1st Gear
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
I understand the meaning. I am just saying that I dont believe there is such a thing as an Emission free electric car. The emissions just come from the electric plant and all the extra coal they need to burn to make the power.
If everyone sold there gas burners today and bought E cars I would like to see a study on the actual emissions savings from the cars vs the new amount of emissions the power plants would put out.

Emission free is a Hydrogen car.

JMO. Not knocking the cars or the people that own them.

ANY MINI is a good MINI
 
Reply
Old Aug 21, 2010 | 07:25 AM
  #8  
BF_'s Avatar
BF_
3rd Gear
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Sad to say there is still going to emissions associated with the production, distribution and sale of Hydrogen.
 
Reply
Old Aug 21, 2010 | 08:07 AM
  #9  
ScottRiqui's Avatar
ScottRiqui
OVERDRIVE
15 Year Member
Liked
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 7,201
Likes: 8
From: Norfolk, VA
First, less than half of our energy generation nationwide comes from coal. Second, it's a LOT more efficient to produce and distribute electricity from a central location than it is to ship and store gasoline all over Hell's half-acre and then burn it in 240 million individual automobile engines to produce power.
 
Reply
Old Aug 26, 2010 | 06:37 AM
  #10  
moondawg14's Avatar
moondawg14
2nd Gear
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by ScottRiqui
First, less than half of our energy generation nationwide comes from coal. Second, it's a LOT more efficient to produce and distribute electricity from a central location than it is to ship and store gasoline all over Hell's half-acre and then burn it in 240 million individual automobile engines to produce power.
Less than half comes from coal, but around 2/3 comes from fossil fuels, with about 20% coming from nuclear, and around 15% from renewables. (source: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electri.../table1_1.html)

There is NO, none, zero, nada, zip, zilch, "emissions-free" method of mechanical transport available today, hydrogen included.
 
Reply
Old Aug 29, 2010 | 01:44 PM
  #11  
praecurvo's Avatar
praecurvo
3rd Gear
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Well, i suppose it depends on how one defines "emissions free." Being that something has to power the production of said vehicle, including horse and carriage, then you are correct moondawg14. But advancements are being made whereas 15% of our energy grid from self-sustainables can easily grow to 50% within 15 years if ALL OF US play our part and act.
aaron
 

Last edited by praecurvo; Sep 24, 2010 at 07:01 PM.
Reply
Old Aug 29, 2010 | 01:50 PM
  #12  
Porthos's Avatar
Porthos
OVERDRIVE
iTrader: (8)
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 6,455
Likes: 14
From: None yours!
I wasn't on the test program but, I did get to drive one in Denver at MTTS. Wow what a cool car. It's is everything that a regular MINI is and its quiet. I would say it was a little bit quicker then a Cooper and you don't have to hit the brakes until you are just about to stop. I would own one if I lived in a house and had to commute about 20 to 30 miles a day.
 
Reply
Old Aug 29, 2010 | 02:23 PM
  #13  
orangecrush's Avatar
orangecrush
Thread Starter
|
6th Gear
iTrader: (37)
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,782
Likes: 1
From: Charlotte, NC.
Originally Posted by ScottRiqui
First, less than half of our energy generation nationwide comes from coal. Second, it's a LOT more efficient to produce and distribute electricity from a central location than it is to ship and store gasoline all over Hell's half-acre and then burn it in 240 million individual automobile engines to produce power.
Scott,

Kind of reminds me of this article. In today's society, we are still in our "infant" stages of producing electric cars. As they are produced and disposed of more and more, the associated costs will lower but right now, it's still cheaper in the long run to drive an H2 or Tahoe.

Though this article is a few years ago, it just proves that it will take a quite a few years for the associated costs of producing electric vehicles to be lower than even the most gas guzzling gas vehicle.


BANDON, Ore., March 31 -- As Americans become increasingly interested in fuel economy and global warming, they are beginning to make choices about the vehicles they drive based on fuel economy and to a lesser degree emissions. But many of those choices aren't actually the best in terms of vehicle lifetime energy usage and the cost to society over the full lifetime of a car or truck.


CNW Marketing Research Inc. spent two years collecting data on the energy necessary to plan, build, sell, drive and dispose of a vehicle from initial concept to scrappage. This includes such minutia as plant to dealer fuel costs, employee driving distances, electricity usage per pound of material used in each vehicle and literally hundreds of other variables.

To put the data into understandable terms for consumers, it was translated into a "dollars per lifetime mile" figure. That is, the Energy Cost per mile driven.

The most Energy Expensive vehicle sold in the U.S. in calendar year 2005: Maybach at $11.58 per mile. The least expensive: Scion xB at $0.48 cents.

While neither of those figures is surprising, it is interesting that driving a hybrid vehicle costs more in terms of overall energy consumed than comparable non-hybrid vehicles.

For example, the Honda Accord Hybrid has an Energy Cost per Mile of $3.29 while the conventional Honda Accord is $2.18. Put simply, over the "Dust to Dust" lifetime of the Accord Hybrid, it will require about 50 percent more energy than the non-hybrid version.

One of the reasons hybrids cost more than non-hybrids is the manufacture, replacement and disposal of such items as batteries, electric motors (in addition to the conventional engine), lighter weight materials and complexity of the power package.

And while many consumers and environmentalists have targeted sport utility vehicles because of their lower fuel economy and/or perceived inefficiency as a means of transportation, the energy cost per mile shows at least some of that disdain is misplaced.

For example, while the industry average of all vehicles sold in the U.S. in 2005 was $2.28 cents per mile, the Hummer H3 (among most SUVs) was only $1.949 cents per mile. That figure is also lower than all currently offered hybrids and Honda Civic at $2.42 per mile.

"If a consumer is concerned about fuel economy because of family budgets or depleting oil supplies, it is perfectly logical to consider buying high- fuel-economy vehicles," says Art Spinella, president of CNW Marketing Research, Inc. "But if the concern is the broader issues such as environmental impact of energy usage, some high-mileage vehicles actually cost society more than conventional or even larger models over their lifetime.

"We believe this kind of data is important in a consumer's selection of transportation," says Spinella. "Basing purchase decisions solely on fuel economy or vehicle size does not get to the heart of the energy usage issue."

The goal of overall worldwide energy conservation and the cost to society in general -- not just the auto buyer -- can often be better addressed by being aware of a car or truck's "dust to dust" energy requirements, he said.

This study is not the end of the energy-usage discussion. "We hope to see a dialog begin that puts educated and aware consumers into energy policy decisions," Spinella said. "We undertook this research to see if perceptions (about energy efficiency) were true in the real world."
 
Reply
Old Aug 29, 2010 | 04:19 PM
  #14  
praecurvo's Avatar
praecurvo
3rd Gear
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by orangecrush
Scott,

Kind of reminds me of this article. In today's society, we are still in our "infant" stages of producing electric cars. As they are produced and disposed of more and more, the associated costs will lower but right now, it's still cheaper in the long run to drive an H2 or Tahoe.

Though this article is a few years ago, it just proves that it will take a quite a few years for the associated costs of producing electric vehicles to be lower than even the most gas guzzling gas vehicle.


BANDON, Ore., March 31 -- As Americans become increasingly interested in fuel economy and global warming, they are beginning to make choices about the vehicles they drive based on fuel economy and to a lesser degree emissions. But many of those choices aren't actually the best in terms of vehicle lifetime energy usage and the cost to society over the full lifetime of a car or truck.


CNW Marketing Research Inc. spent two years collecting data on the energy necessary to plan, build, sell, drive and dispose of a vehicle from initial concept to scrappage. This includes such minutia as plant to dealer fuel costs, employee driving distances, electricity usage per pound of material used in each vehicle and literally hundreds of other variables.

To put the data into understandable terms for consumers, it was translated into a "dollars per lifetime mile" figure. That is, the Energy Cost per mile driven.

The most Energy Expensive vehicle sold in the U.S. in calendar year 2005: Maybach at $11.58 per mile. The least expensive: Scion xB at $0.48 cents.

While neither of those figures is surprising, it is interesting that driving a hybrid vehicle costs more in terms of overall energy consumed than comparable non-hybrid vehicles.

For example, the Honda Accord Hybrid has an Energy Cost per Mile of $3.29 while the conventional Honda Accord is $2.18. Put simply, over the "Dust to Dust" lifetime of the Accord Hybrid, it will require about 50 percent more energy than the non-hybrid version.

One of the reasons hybrids cost more than non-hybrids is the manufacture, replacement and disposal of such items as batteries, electric motors (in addition to the conventional engine), lighter weight materials and complexity of the power package.

And while many consumers and environmentalists have targeted sport utility vehicles because of their lower fuel economy and/or perceived inefficiency as a means of transportation, the energy cost per mile shows at least some of that disdain is misplaced.

For example, while the industry average of all vehicles sold in the U.S. in 2005 was $2.28 cents per mile, the Hummer H3 (among most SUVs) was only $1.949 cents per mile. That figure is also lower than all currently offered hybrids and Honda Civic at $2.42 per mile.

"If a consumer is concerned about fuel economy because of family budgets or depleting oil supplies, it is perfectly logical to consider buying high- fuel-economy vehicles," says Art Spinella, president of CNW Marketing Research, Inc. "But if the concern is the broader issues such as environmental impact of energy usage, some high-mileage vehicles actually cost society more than conventional or even larger models over their lifetime.

"We believe this kind of data is important in a consumer's selection of transportation," says Spinella. "Basing purchase decisions solely on fuel economy or vehicle size does not get to the heart of the energy usage issue."

The goal of overall worldwide energy conservation and the cost to society in general -- not just the auto buyer -- can often be better addressed by being aware of a car or truck's "dust to dust" energy requirements, he said.

This study is not the end of the energy-usage discussion. "We hope to see a dialog begin that puts educated and aware consumers into energy policy decisions," Spinella said. "We undertook this research to see if perceptions (about energy efficiency) were true in the real world."
All valid points.
Additionally, with a greater focus on the future of a self-sustainable energy infrastructure, hybrid, PHEV, and EV cars make nothing but sense. By consumers investing their capital throughout the initial stages of EV/Hybrid development, we are participating in the revolutionary advancements that will lead to our self-sustainability. Purchasing an H2 or Tahoe does it's part as well, by funding the brands future in an indirect but relative way.
aaron
 
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2010 | 05:40 PM
  #15  
praecurvo's Avatar
praecurvo
3rd Gear
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
I truly look forward to BMW's next step in EV production after this trial run. I am not sure if they are leasing out those 1 series EV's yet or at all, but in the not-so-distant future, their EV's will be some of the most desirable on the market!!
here's what I know for sure...
all-new fwd 1 series EV (expected end of 2013)
^should share platform with new clubman
BMW Mega City vehicle EV (2013-2014)
BMW Efficient Dynamics based EV performance car (2014)
Cooper EV (production)???
Countryman EV???
What else?
aaron
 
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2010 | 05:41 PM
  #16  
praecurvo's Avatar
praecurvo
3rd Gear
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
too many clicks
 
Reply
Old Aug 31, 2010 | 05:41 PM
  #17  
praecurvo's Avatar
praecurvo
3rd Gear
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
oops
 
Reply
Old Sep 2, 2010 | 07:47 AM
  #18  
MINIE250's Avatar
MINIE250
1st Gear
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by moondawg14
Less than half comes from coal, but around 2/3 comes from fossil fuels, with about 20% coming from nuclear, and around 15% from renewables. (source: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electri.../table1_1.html)

There is NO, none, zero, nada, zip, zilch, "emissions-free" method of mechanical transport available today, hydrogen included.
Moondawg:

I'm one of the MINI-E drivers and have a home based solar PV system that generates all of the electricity that I charge the car with. I have just had the car for 15 months now and charge it with clean, renewable electricity. How is this not an emission-free vehicle?
 
Reply
Old Sep 2, 2010 | 10:01 AM
  #19  
praecurvo's Avatar
praecurvo
3rd Gear
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Yeah, retrospectively, I believe Moondawg14 is being a little too thorough. He is referring to the fabrication process of everything involved, including Mini manufacturing, PV manufacturing, etc.
MinnieE250: you have a PV system at home as well...?
AWESOME!!! what setup do you have and what are the specs?
how long to charge?
how much elev is generated?
battery assist or not?
whatever else?
aaron
 
Reply
Old Sep 24, 2010 | 06:53 PM
  #20  
praecurvo's Avatar
praecurvo
3rd Gear
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
bump MiniE250?
aaron
 
Reply
Old Sep 27, 2010 | 06:41 PM
  #21  
moondawg14's Avatar
moondawg14
2nd Gear
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by MINIE250
Moondawg:

I'm one of the MINI-E drivers and have a home based solar PV system that generates all of the electricity that I charge the car with. I have just had the car for 15 months now and charge it with clean, renewable electricity. How is this not an emission-free vehicle?
There was significant energy (and thus emissions) invested to create both your car and your PV array, inverter,etc. You continue to use tires, transmission oil, etc.

I'm not trying to diminish the significant(positive) impact that electric vehicles could have on the environment. I'm just saying that "emissions free" is a little optimistic.
 
Reply
Old Jul 25, 2015 | 06:02 PM
  #22  
Ender's Avatar
Ender
1st Gear
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by ScottRiqui
First, less than half of our energy generation nationwide comes from coal. Second, it's a LOT more efficient to produce and distribute electricity from a central location than it is to ship and store gasoline all over Hell's half-acre and then burn it in 240 million individual automobile engines to produce power.
Sheeesh!!! im a steamfitter, i love all those pipelines, refineries...
 
Reply
Old Jul 25, 2015 | 06:42 PM
  #23  
Fly'n Brick's Avatar
Fly'n Brick
6th Gear
15 Year Member
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,961
Likes: 392
From: In the here and now, for now.
Can't believe it's been 5 years since the E sprung to life. Lots of interest at the outset but haven't seen or heard a peep out of it until just now. A quiet death, perhaps?
 
Reply
Old Jul 25, 2015 | 06:59 PM
  #24  
ZippyNH's Avatar
ZippyNH
6th Gear
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 12,605
Likes: 41
From: Southern NH
Originally Posted by Fly'n Brick
Can't believe it's been 5 years since the E sprung to life. Lots of interest at the outset but haven't seen or heard a peep out of it until just now. A quiet death, perhaps?
It was a test program..cars were leased if I recall...
So cars went back to MINI...
We're likely destroyed, except for a few museum piece's....
 
Reply
Old Jul 25, 2015 | 07:03 PM
  #25  
ZippyNH's Avatar
ZippyNH
6th Gear
iTrader: (1)
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 12,605
Likes: 41
From: Southern NH
Originally Posted by Ender
Sheeesh!!! im a steamfitter, i love all those pipelines, refineries...
Wow...responding toba 5 year old post...
 
Reply

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:56 PM.