2017 BMW i3 94 Ah Gets Official EPA Ratings – 114 Miles Combined

1 year ago by Eric Loveday 51

2017 BMW i3 Detailed Range Ratings From EPA

2017 BMW i3 Detailed Range Ratings From EPA

2017 i3 60 Ah Versus i3 94 Ah

2017 i3 60 Ah Versus i3 94 Ah – Click to Enlarge

The numbers are finally in…

Earlier this week, we learned that there was a bit of a hold up at port on the new 2017 BMW i3 with the larger 33 kWh battery on board. The hold up was apparently due to EPA testing not yet being complete/reported.

But now that issue is out of the way and the official EPA figures are available.

According to the EPA, the higher capacity BMW i3 (94 Ah/33 kWh battery) returns 123.8 miles in electric city driving and 101.9 on the highway. The combined electric-only range is listed at 114 miles.

All three figures are a significant improvement over the 60 Ah version (22 kWh battery) of the i3, which is listed with a city range of 89 miles, a highway range of 71.6 miles and a combined range of only 81 miles.

Efficiency, as expected, is down slightly due to the heavier battery pack in the 94 Ah version (see image).  Additional details on the 94 Ah BMW i3, including U.S. pricing and launch schedule, can be found here and here.

Editor’s Note:  Because we know it will be asked…the official range/details for the 94 Ah version of the BMW i3 REx (PHEV) have yet to be released.  We will pass along those numbers when available; but it does beg the question if the longer range REx i3 is yet available to be purchased in the US?

Tags: , , , , , ,

51 responses to "2017 BMW i3 94 Ah Gets Official EPA Ratings – 114 Miles Combined"

  1. Hauer says:

    Double that and you are in my Recall.

    1. RexxSee says:

      Only 7 more miles than the 2016 Leaf, meh.

      1. Losers says:

        Still 114 miles more than the 2016 model 3

      2. Apkungen says:

        Not impressed either… 33kWh, lighter car and slimmer wheels should do way better 🙁

  2. Dave says:

    ampere-hours? why can’t they use kilowatt-hours? are they doing it because the number is bigger?

    1. Dan says:

      That’s not the total. It’s the capacity of a single cell. Batteries are not rated in kWh.

      1. John Norris says:

        >> Batteries are not rated in kWh <<

        But every other EV on the planet is!

      2. Mikael says:

        The energy that is holds is the only interesting thing to know about the battery for the comman man.

        So there is no reason to call it the 94 ah BMW i3 when you can easily call it the 33 kWh BMW i3. That is what you should and what we generally do.

        1. Ambulator says:

          This same point brought up every time there is a story on the new i3 and yet the next time the headline is still about ampere hours.

          Hello up there! Is anyone listening?

        2. Rich says:

          BMW arrogance betting on peoples ignorance.

          Example: The Tesla Model S 90 and the BMW i3 94. The i3 must be better because it’s number is higher. Not only does the i3 have a higher number, it’s at a lower price.

          It’s a sleazy tactic.

          1. WARREN says:

            That’s a stretch. Kind of like saying Fiat 500e is a higher number than a 90D, so the Fiat must be superior.

    2. vik says:

      There is a difference between capacity and Energy. Capacity tells you how much current you can output for a certain amount of time. Batteries of different voltages can have the same capacity, however to determine the energy of the cell you have to multiply the voltage by the Capacity. For example if there is a 12V battery with a 100Amp*hrs capacity then it will have 1.2 Kwatt*hrs of energy whereas a 1.5V battery with 100 Ahrs will have 150 watt*hrs of energy.

      1. vik says:

        I = Current, V = Voltage, P = Power, C = Capacity, E = Energy, T = Time;

        P = V * I; E = P * T; E = V * I * T; C = I * T; E = V * C

  3. David Murray says:

    The new range is actually enough to make me consider a BEV version instead of the Rex. With the older version the Rex was a requirement for consideration. I think if it had about 150 miles of EPA range, the Rex would likely no longer even be a consideration for me.

    1. mx9000 says:

      Hence, the rising price.

      1. carcus says:

        BMW wants $44,595 for the i3, because the battery cost them approximately $4,785 ….. makes PERFECT sense.

        /BMW sure is proud of their plastic

  4. pjwood1 says:

    People have to do their homework.

    -102 highway versus 124 city is a big spread
    -Where do these numbers go, at 20-40 degrees F?
    -If REx, will you sweat going to the gas station after every cold 90-100 mile day.

    1. franky_b says:

      The current BMW i3 REX has the same 29kWh/100miles and living in Canada, I will only come close to 29kWh/100miles winter time, summer time I easily get under 24kWh/100miles without even trying hard.

      So the numbers are very realistic for winter condition.

      1. pjwood1 says:

        The only numbers, given above, were for 103 and 124 miles of all-battery range. Those numbers are not realistic for winter conditions. If some can manage 49 miles of range from the current i3, using heat, the ~50% bigger battery won’t be delivering 100 miles for many.

        1. franky_b says:

          Here we go…. the only real numbers that counts is how efficient the car is and the capacity of the battery. Everything depends on external elements, like how agressively you drive a car, wind, temperature, your comfort, etc… So before you can say it’s impossible, you say that on what basis?

          To be clear, I own the current generation of i3, a BMW i3 REX to be clear.

          In winter condition, meaning -5C, -10C, I do 110km to 120km on the highway @100km/h. That’s real life numbers in real life conditions. Now if it get really cold, by that I mean -20C, -25C, then yes you are right, but these aren’t typical conditions. And BTW,the REX doesn’t have the thermopomp as the BEV version has.

          Summer time, in normal condition (20C-25C), I do between 130-140Km on the highway @100km. I only gave highway number, because it seems to be a fixation here.

          The only thing I do, I put the car in eco-pro, the temperature is set @18C winter time and @23C summer time.

          So before you say it’s impossible, a least provide more details. BTW, some people do much better then me, that’s what having the most efficient car allow you to do.

          1. pjwood1 says:

            You’re basically claiming to get 75 miles from an i3 REx, in battery mode, when its 20-30 degrees F outside. That means not heating the cabin, especially in the REx where EPA range is, what, 72 miles?

            I don’t think you paint a fair picture. Most people want heat when its below freezing.

            1. franky_b says:

              Let me try this again

              I don’t know where you live, but heating the cabin 18C (64F) while it’s -10C (14F), it’s heating. At those temperature you typicaly wear winter gear (boots, coat), makes no sense to heat the cabin to 23C (73F).

              The EPA rating, that’s what I was trying to explain, either I suck at it or you are not reading. The EPA rating is fair as it actually show usage where there are outside elements impacting the range (cold or heat) and people should be confident to meet or beat these numbers. And my point was, that I beat these numbers in normal winter condition in Canada and far exceed them summer time.

            2. franky_b says:

              Yes, EPA rating is 72 miles
              https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=38001&id=38000&id=37222

              Yes, I do meet and exceed that rating, highway, 62mph. Of course that also meet I go well over that rating in city driving.

            3. franky_b says:

              BTW, any driver that doesn’t always put the pedal in the medal can beat EPA numbers.

              The idea of the EPA number was to provide realistic numbers and comparable numbers where the cars are tested in the same conditions.

              Leaf & Tesla owner also beat EPA numbers. If you don’t, you should reconsider your driving style.

              1. jimmyJohn says:

                I think it’s funny that you, an owner, are arguing with someone who clearly is arguing based on what he reads on the internet and wants to talk trash.

                1. franky_b says:

                  Well, I don’t think it’s funny. It is beacause of people like him that we have difficulty promoting EV. Because they can’t grasp that it’s not because the car doesn’t correspond to THEIR needs that it’s a bad car.

                  Then they don’t understand what the EPA rating his and go on and on even if people like me who own the car explain why they are wrong. But if I don’t say anything, then he turns around with “creative truth” and repeat it to who ever wants to hear it.

                  Because even if he still doesn’t beleive me, at least a person like you can read both and can understand which one make sense. But no, not funny at all.

  5. Pedro says:

    Great.

    The BMW i3 (94 Ah) is already being delivered in Europe. We’ll see an increase in sales.

    In the other hand, the better looking and aerodynamic facelift Leaf with 40 kWh usable battery capacity will enter production in December this year. The EPA range could reach 160 miles.

    1. Terawatt says:

      These LEAF rumours are popping up more and more often. What’s your source?

      1. Pedro says:

        Some persons that work directly with Nissan.

  6. DangerHV says:

    It does seem odd, or pitiful, having their battery capacity in amp-hours instead of kWh. Many people will assume the Tesla S90 has a smaller battery than the BMW i3 94ah, and the S60 is somehow equal to the i3 60ah.
    After seeing BMW’s recently posted shameful ad’s, I’m convinced it has been done with this intention. A disgrace, BMW!
    Maybe a law will be passed so all ev battery packs must have standardized capacity ratings.

    1. viktor says:

      That’s mean that BMW have succeeded with there marketing wish is a shame, everybody schould use kWh to make it easier for everyone to understand.

    2. zzzzzzzzzz says:

      Tesla battery kWh also doesn’t match the number in model name. Then you have total and usable capacity, aerodynamics, drivetrain losses, etc. It is silly for end customer to worry about such internal technical parameters – you have EPA range and mpge, that is what really matters.

      1. pjwood1 says:

        Yeah right, then start explaining “33kwh per gallon” and watch their eyes glaze over. Nobody gets “MPGe”, and it says nothing about the economic answers people seek, what they pay per kwh, or gallon. Nothing.

        “Kwh” gives:
        -Electric Power
        -Range
        -Quiet
        -An expensive commodity BMW evidently doesn’t want us to understand.

        I’ve seen the 330e ad, thumping MPGe. All we really need to know is “another 10kwh car”.

        NOx – VW
        HP – Tesla
        Ah – BMW
        MPGe – EPA

        Why not criticize all of the above? I am obviously not a fan of saying only positive things. At some point, it’s not constructive.

    3. franky_b says:

      Ok… This is how they identify the 2 version. The battery capacity is 33kW, it has been known since day 1.

    4. liberty says:

      It is a 33 kwh pack with 27.2 usable capacity. Numbers are freely available, so I don’t see the problem with reporting extra information like the cell capacity. Highway milage is up 43% and usable capacity is up 43% city is up 39% so there is a slight weight penalty, but the bigger difference is bmw is now using a smaller percentage of the usable capacity of the new chemistry.

    5. Yoda says:

      On BMWs website they only list 22kwh for the battery size…
      This website is the one telling you the cell ah so why are you complaining about BMW misleading you???

      Tesla fan boys are more annoying than Tesla shorters…

      Your comments are FUD nothing more…

  7. MTN Ranger says:

    I would say that this should have been the i3’s electric range when it debuted (I know the battery chemistry wasn’t available back then, but BMW should have made a bigger pack). REX sales would be much lower.

    1. Terawatt says:

      The real problem isn’t so much the size or weight, but the cost. Delivering the car with 33 kWh three short years ago would have made it way too expensive.

      I reckon BMW deserves some cred for boosting capacity by 50% in 3 years. Next to Nissan’s 25% increase over six years they look kinda good.

      Next to the Bolt, and the Ampera-e whenever that arrives, they’ll look kinda silly tho!

      1. Yoda says:

        There is a strong posibility BMW will upgrade to Samsung 120ah cells next year for even more range…

        1. franky_b says:

          You meant 125Ah?

          http://insideevs.com/can-bmw-fend-off-charge-tesla-model-3-part-2/

          Base on confirmed information and best guest of insiders, that would be in 2019.

  8. Mike says:

    It is nice to see most/all of the mainstream BEVs move past the 100 mile range mark. The 70-80 mile highway range made them impractical for me.

  9. Chris B says:

    Here is the early days of EVs the new i3 Rex combined with the larger battery pack seems like a natural competitor to the upcoming Bolt. The combined gas/electric range of the i3 rex (33kw model) will be similar to the Bolt, both cars will do virtually all their daily driving on gas, they have similar utility and shape, and their acceleration numbers will likely be similar (actually, from the reports, it looks like the Bolt will be quicker). While the interior on the i3 will likely be nicer, the tech in the Bolt will probably be better (bigger screen, Android auto and apple carplay, etc). Price will go to the Bolt, but the ir range extender will be more flexible for longer distance travel (although neither is really well suited to it).

    1. Bacardi says:

      Really think they’re two different cars for two different kinds of people…You either desire 200+ miles of range or a luxury badge…There are reports that an i3 owner may have one to use the HOV and also has a weekend BMW M3…The Bolt will be quicker then the REX and BEV i3…Tech is very subjective, very few people are in love with CarPlay because you’re forced to use an inferior Apple Maps…The i3 offers ACC, the Bolt doesn’t…

  10. Michael B says:

    50% more battery but only 40% more range. The weight does matter. Also this confirms that two versions of a car will be sold in US

    1. franky_b says:

      3 configurations confirmed a few months ago:

      BEV 60Ah
      BEV 94Ah
      REX 94Ah

    2. Art Isbell says:

      There’s only 45% more usable battery capacity due to larger unusable buffers in the 94 aH battery pack. The additional weight is ~100 lb. The combination yields 41% greater combined range.

  11. Bacardi says:

    BMW was sued by REX owners for the low power mode and there haven’t been many updates…That could have something to do with the REX’s delay…

  12. Steve says:

    It appears they may have increased the buffers. Can this be confirmed. I wouldn’t be surprised if the lower buffer is much bigger to maintain performance with a low charge, especially after the Rex lawsuit.

    1. Terawatt says:

      I agree. Especially the highway numbers point to increased buffer, since efficiency on the highway is nearly unaffected by the increased weight. Amperage is up by more than 50% but highway range only by 40%. To my mind this must mean a larger portion of the pack is now configured as buffer.

      1. Art Isbell says:

        That’t correct.

        13% unusable buffer in the 60 aH version.
        18% unusable buffer in the 94 aH version.

  13. ulms says:

    if the bmw i3 with a 33kWh battery gets only 114 miles i really don’t know how the tesla model 3 will manage a range of 200+ miles wit a 55kWh battery.
    Because the bmw is the much smaller car and with his carbon fibers and the small wheels optimized for a longer range.
    the tesla is much heavier because it use steel, is the bigger car and has all the time a much heavier battery with it
    i think the tesal would need a 65kWh Batterie to get 200 miles. sorry for my english g