MINI E finally official, 500 available soon for US test drivers
Filed under: Transportation
Relevant Posts
- Chevy Volt's powertrain and recharging clarified (23 days ago - 150 Comments)
- Chevy Volt hits the road, video style (29 days ago - 94 Comments)
- Chrysler, Jeep and Dodge electric vehicle prototypes get outed (25 days ago - 52 Comments)
- Chrysler's new electric vehicles shown on video (24 days ago - 26 Comments)
- Tesla co-founder says car wastes energy while parked (3 days ago - 83 Comments)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Jonathan Ace @ Oct 18th 2008 6:05PM
sweet!
i would start saving up for this
Patrick @ Oct 18th 2008 7:28PM
DUDE i know! im gonna be 16 soon. i am SOOO saving up for this
WANT!!
*ahem* yes. this is a good product. I believe that...screw it, i WANT IT!
Jesse S @ Oct 18th 2008 6:08PM
If it cost less than or equal to $30,000 I would get one in a heartbeat. $60,000 is just way too uneconomical.
scott @ Oct 18th 2008 6:55PM
agreed. I was considering the Dodge Challenger. But if this is commercially successful and they produce them for around 30k. I'll have no problem getting one as my next vehicle.
KC @ Oct 19th 2008 1:12AM
Not to mention the BMW priced maintenance. Say good bye to the fuel savings, you'll just be giving that money back to BMW instead.
PuBeLeSs @ Oct 18th 2008 6:08PM
the mini is the perfect eclectic car. to bad they are going to be rather pricey i bet
Samboini @ Oct 18th 2008 6:13PM
I'd pull you to pieces for your typo but somehow the word electic is just as fitting. Albeit only in this instance!
egloskerry @ Oct 18th 2008 6:27PM
@Samboini - You fail because you had a typo yourself.
lowdef @ Oct 18th 2008 6:29PM
is your name pubeless? + 1 internetz
Samboini @ Oct 18th 2008 7:21PM
O the irony!
Charbax @ Oct 18th 2008 6:11PM
This is going to get so much fun!
Obama is going to make it so that GM, Ford and all those guys product 100% electric cars within months.
Tata Motors, French and Italian car manufacturers and others should be able to make those cars starting at $5000 each.
Also, they should include 5-minute quick high voltage recharge technology so that once there are recharge stations spread around the world using this same quick high voltage recharge technology, people can have an Internet connected GPS system in the car showing them the closest quick recharging station.
Of course the electric energy can come mostly from Wind and Solar within the next 4 years.
Samboini @ Oct 18th 2008 6:15PM
Within the next 4 years? Do you know how much planning it takes just to get one renewable energy plant up and running, let alone a whole infrastructure to support a country's thriving thirst for electric vehicles. Tragically disillusioned mate.
lowdef @ Oct 18th 2008 6:17PM
You're right I forgot obama is going to nationalize all the car companies...how could I forget its all part of his socialist plot. I also like how you pull random numbers out of your ass. "These companies can make "X" for "X" dollars because I say so." You are so ignorant it isn't funny.
I also love how most people buy into Obama's BS on car makers. Lets help out American manufacturers (i.e. his union $$ he gets). When in reality American companies put the jobs overseas and the foreign companies he bitches about make a superior product HERE with AMERICAN parts and labor.
lowdef @ Oct 18th 2008 6:23PM
hahaha he tries to use Obama in almost every post look at his history. I guess he thinks Obama is going to be the all-knowing, all-powerful leader of the freeworld, technology, corporations, reproduction, morality etc...so sad...
anyways, finally an attractive electric car not made by a shady company.
Charbax @ Oct 18th 2008 6:35PM
It's proven fact, most energy needs can be made from Solar and Wind within 4 years. All you need is the time it can possibly take to make a mass production industry to mass manufacture wind and solar hardware fast enough.
There is absolutely no time required to know where those solar panels and where those wind mills need to be setup, we know exactly where it makes most sense to set them up. And also to retool the electricity grid network to make it more usable for a solar and wind energy system.
$5000 per car is not some invented number, it is actual fact of what it costs to manufacture a car. The electric car engine is NO WAY more complicated or more expensive then the old fashioned gas powered car. The only reason current electric cars are expensive is cause they are not mass manufactured. BMW is only hand making 100 here and Tesla a couple hundred there.
The Lithium Ion battery might cost about $3000 on top of the cost of the car, but that battery can be leased out by a new Electric Car battery industry that also makes sure to manufacture the batteries in the most environmentally friendly ways to recycles them as much as possible.
It is also a proven fact that everything can change very quickly, it is only the question of political will. To take away the trillion dollar revenue from OIL industry and give it instead to a trillion dollar new solar, wind and electric car industry. It only takes a few handshakes and a signature to change things around.
Tohe @ Oct 18th 2008 6:44PM
To be fair and to keep things in perspective, what Sen. Obama envisioned and expressed is a time-frame for energy independence of 10 years, so even he recognizes he won't be president when and if it finally happens.
Samboini @ Oct 18th 2008 7:25PM
Charbax I understand where you are coming from, but as it currently stands 'renewable' energy plants are taking more power to construct then they will ever provide over their lifetime. I don't want to piss on your parade, again, but get your facts in order. Don't get me wrong though, i'm all for solar, hydro et al, but unfortunately they are still not advanced enough.
Charbax @ Oct 18th 2008 7:37PM
Samboini, that is just not true. The investment for building and setting up a wind mill is recouped in LESS than 5 years. This is proven fact, just visit Vestas website for proven facts.
Farmers are making more money setting up wind mills in their fields and selling the generated energy at market value for electricity then growing food on their fields.
Solar panels are exactly the same thing. The cost per kWh generated using Solar panels is paid for within 5 years, that is at the CURRENT solar panel manufacturing prices. Some silicon valley companies sponsored by Google and others even have cheaper solar panel technologies that can pay for themselves in less then that amount of time.
So simply from a totally basic cost perspective, it simply does NOT make sense not to build and setup as many wind mills and solar panels as possible.
The ONLY reason we are not doing it yet is cause there are private energy MONOPOLIES that control energy today, they have their own last century sources of energy which they have complete control over. And by having that control on ressources, they can control the prices, control revenue and control profits. So the only reason we are not powered by Solar and Wind yet is cause unlimied free and clean p2p energy economy would totally remove those corporations complete control on energy sources.
Valicore @ Oct 18th 2008 8:55PM
Let's bring you back around to reality Charbux - while I wish that were all true, you have to make people REALLY UNCOMFORTABLE before they'll change. Things aren't uncomfortable enough yet. I personally think that barring any shortage of raw materials, every new edifice should be required to install solar panels. Can you imagine the effect of that? That'd be cool, selon moi.
Chuckles McGee @ Oct 18th 2008 9:15PM
You totally have drunk the Kool-Aid.
liin @ Oct 18th 2008 9:40PM
Keep in mind it was political enforcement for manufacturers to produce a set percentage of their cars to be zero carbon emission that killed EV-1. If you force businesses to produce more than demand, they'd rather kill off a new venture. What leaders can do is to create awareness, which would lead to demand for these new business ventures, which will be the only drive to bring them to reality.
On the legal front, governments can, and should, enforce production of any goods to a standard that's cleaner for the environment. But they shouldn't force businesses to produce certain goods, it'll be a big mess.
Charbax @ Oct 18th 2008 10:17PM
Nah, EV1 was killed when California politicians were corrupted into removing that law proposal which would have provided "a set percentage of their cars to be zero carbon emission".
EV1 was GM doing tests preparing for that law getting into effect in California. Cause noone would have been allowed to sell cars in California without providing that set percentage of clean cars.
Same thing is going to happen and will become national law under Obama, look forward to it. These are the percentages of 100% electric cars that any car manufacturer will have to produce to get allowed to sell any car within the US or EU, otherwise car manufacturers that don't comply will be fined in extra taxes, giving a huge advantage to car manufacturers that comply and do provide the electric cars. In return, the state will provide recharge stations everywhere. On top of tax breaks on the actual electric cars and for the owners of electric cars.
Following are percentage of Electric, Hydrogen or Clean Ethanol cars that will have to be provided under Obama's clean energy law propositions:
2009: 1%
2010: 10%
2011: 30%
2012: 50%
Knives_Out @ Oct 19th 2008 12:20AM
... riding the Obama BS express.
stupid people think Obama is going to rain money down on them if elected president.
wickedpheonix @ Oct 19th 2008 3:20AM
"And also to retool the electricity grid network to make it more usable for a solar and wind energy system."
And this is a simple thing? I recently went to a lecture here in Los Angeles where the environmentalist was decrying the fact that we don't have solar panels on top of a lot of LA roofs and pumping energy back into the grid since we've had almost nothing but cloudless days since summer. Well guess what? It's not that easy - you have to retool the ENTIRE grid from the street level to the fundamental backbone level in order for the grid to be able to handle these micro-insertions of electricity. On a national scale you're talking about getting electric companies to basically overhaul their systems that have worked for years and years, the only reason being (from a business perspective for them), is that they will end up paying their customers rather than their customers paying them. And if they wanted to resell some of that solar energy, you can't just say "here, come take some" to a part of the grid halfway across the nation, you have to transport it there which has it's own problems due to inefficiencies - basic equation is just Ohm's law, Voltage = current times resistance and just trying to get everything pumped across the country isn't that simple.
What you're talking about is really just nationalizing the power companies - what's next? I'm not saying that solar and wind are bad things I'm just saying that it's impractical until we improve infrastructure on a national level - not just power either, but (in general) also Internet backbones, highway management (we STILL haven't fixed 2-hour long commutes?) - anyone who lives in Southern California knows that traffic is a PITA, the obvious fix is just to build more lanes above/under the existing highway as express lanes except for a) environmental impact studies b) other red tape and most importantly c) the ridiculous amount of money it would take for such a thing. But this is important, it much improves things in the long run before everything shuts down - using the highway example, if there is an accident then the express lanes above and below can continue running easily whereas today people wait on the highway for hours and hours while they're bottlenecked.
Charbax @ Oct 19th 2008 6:23AM
The solution for California is getting much better public transportation systems. The best solution would be a huge personal rapid transit system: http://cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/13/tech/main4518448.shtml
It'd be much cheaper then anything else.
Retooling the grid to support solar and wind is not very hard. Google has investments in that. Basically you just upgrade it to work like an Internet network, and you store huge amounts of energy generated overnight by wind or during the day by solar in those Electric Car batteries and Electric car high voltage recharge station batteries. You can then, on-demand take also that energy from the parked cars.
It's not very expensive at all. And yes, I think the energy companies should be nationalized, just as banks should be. Energy is for the people, it's not for corporations. Especially when the energy is made from natural resources or when it pollutes the natural resources.
Fernando @ Oct 18th 2008 6:13PM
wow, look at the comments in autoblog, so... civilized
lowdef @ Oct 18th 2008 6:19PM
hahaha wow. clean exchanges of questions and answers. I did notice one such exchange on an article here the other day. Quite a rarity.
pbase @ Oct 18th 2008 6:17PM
Lord, I'm looking forward to the electric revolution. If for no other reason, just to end the ugly sight of soot-covered roadside snow banks every winter.
why not the LS2LS7? @ Oct 18th 2008 6:28PM
Gas cars don't produce soot. You think it's Diesels making all that?
I think it's road dirt and tire bits on those snow banks. Things that won't go away with electric cars.
lowdef @ Oct 18th 2008 6:36PM
I find it kind of odd that dark snow is your main beef with combustion engine cars...There's plenty of other reasons that affect the world on more than an aesthetic level.
Badger_badger_badger @ Oct 18th 2008 11:52PM
Dirt + Snow = what you are seeing, not soot covered snow...
ben @ Oct 18th 2008 6:27PM
"It's even mini-er than I imagined!!"
...I love Scrubs...
lowdef @ Oct 18th 2008 6:49PM
"It is also a proven fact that everything can change very quickly, it is only the question of political will. To take away the trillion dollar revenue from OIL industry and give it instead to a trillion dollar new solar, wind and electric car industry. It only takes a few handshakes and a signature to change things around."
How old are you? Holy hell, get some perspective. We get at most, as of 2008, 1% of our energy from wind. Wind is not subsidised, wind costs $3-5 more per kilowatt hour. Do you realize that government is a lot more than handshakes and a signature? Do you understand how massive the oil lobby is? Do you understand that you cannot PROVE that "EVERYTHING CAN CHANGE QUICKLY?" that is just such an absurd statement I am still laughing. Europe has been all over wind since the 1970s and it still provides under 25% of their energy (either Germany, Netherlands, or somewhere else idk)
Could you point me to a link with a $5000 electric car? The tata you mention is a shitty ass combustion engine car.
"There is absolutely no time required to know where those solar panels and where those wind mills need to be setup, we know exactly where it makes most sense to set them up. And also to retool the electricity grid network to make it more usable for a solar and wind energy system."
Of fucking course there has to be research done. You don't just say, hey its windy here lets build a multi billion dollar wind farm. You have to jump through all kinds of enviromental hoops and impact studies. You are looking at a 2+ year window BEFORE you put a single turbine online.
lowdef @ Oct 18th 2008 6:50PM
That was a reply to Charbax
Xlar @ Oct 18th 2008 7:26PM
Wind or solar energy would be a good way to meet the U.S.'s energy needs but the main problem with it is the amount of land that you need to make this energy. Have you ever seen a field of solar panels or wind turbines? They are absolutely huge and then you look at the amount to energy that is produced; until they become a lot more efficient it just isn't a feasible energy source.
Charbax @ Oct 18th 2008 7:50PM
Fact is, a little windy country, where I live, called Denmark, as managed to cover 20% of their electric energy needs with Wind in the matter of less then 20 years of really limited political will. Sincev 2001 though, Denmark has a corrupted by oil right wing conservative prime minister that pals around with Bush the terrorist, so since 2001, Danish wind % has been lowered. Thanks to the oil pumping neo-cons.
There is absolutely no research needed to start installing Wind and Solar in the USA. The American Universities all have already full research done and they know EXACTLY where to put the wind mills and solar panels right away. And the scientists and engineers know also exactly how to change the electrical grid to optimize the use of such Solar and Wind energy sources.
FACT is solar and wind energy is TOTALLY 100% free after only as little as 5 years after installation. That is counting the actual value of the energy they provide based on the current unsubsidized energy costs. FACT is maintenance costs using modern solar and wind technologies are minimal and have no significant effect on long term solar and wind costs.
FACT is from a purely economical perspective, not building as much Solar and Wind energy today simply does not make any sense. Of course that is unless you are working for the current OIL, GAS and Coal industry, then for sure, for your revenues and profits, moving over to Solar and Wind simply doesn't make any sense. Since Solar and Wind is not going to be controlled by any one corporation, but instead installed and controlled by thousands of companies, built and setup by thousands of local governments and counties, since the long term profits from Solar and Wind are not going into one corporations pockets, but instead will be shared by the whole population.
Basically it means that within 10 years, 100% of energy can be not only clean, it can be totally free and basically unlimited.
carl @ Oct 19th 2008 1:04AM
I just looked at my most recent electric bill. I buy wind from my local electric utility, and out of a 35$ monthly bill, about $2.50 of that is a surcharge for wind above and beyond the basic cost. That's 0.8 cents (yes, cents) per kilowatt hour extra. You're about 3 orders of magnitude off with your claim regarding the additional cost of wind. Care to clarify?
wickedpheonix @ Oct 19th 2008 3:07AM
When lowdef said that it wasn't subsidized he meant on a national level. Wind power may be partially subsidized in your district.
matt @ Oct 19th 2008 3:39AM
Anyone who prints 'fact' in capital letters is in no way strengthening their argument.
It can only get works with the addition of exclamation marks.
lowdef @ Oct 19th 2008 3:57AM
my bad guys at the national level it plays out like this:
"Cost per unit of energy produced was estimated in 2006 to be comparable to the cost of new generating capacity in the United States for coal and natural gas: wind cost was estimated at $55.80 per MWh, coal at $53.10/MWh and natural gas at $52.50."-Wikipedia (lol)
I'm all for more wind (Im from TX btw) but this Charbax or whatever guy has no idea what he is talking about...
dotAaron @ Oct 18th 2008 6:52PM
Now that is an awesome car :D
Why the effing hell has it taken them so effing long to create an electric car you wouldn't be embarassed to drive in?
patriotsn1 @ Oct 18th 2008 7:39PM
ehem....
http://www.engadget.com/2008/04/26/california-man-builds-his-own-solar-electric-vehicle-good-looks/
dotAaron @ Oct 18th 2008 7:55PM
@patriotsn1
LOL :P
iansilv @ Oct 18th 2008 7:41PM
a mini just pulled up beside me...
You know what cracks me up? These stupid f&@$ing car companies doing tests like this to we if consumers like them. Like it takes a Harvard grad to figure out people don't like paying for gas....
"gee thompson, does the rear arch show consumers want electric cars that don't need gas?"
"well after we have spent five years and millions of dollars on market research, it turns out people are pissed about high gas prices! Who knew?!? So yeah, we think we might sell a few 150 mile range pkugin 2.5 hour charge minis!"
I WANT the American manufacturers to fail because of their stupidity. That volt better be pretty freaking cool.
Valicore @ Oct 18th 2008 10:01PM
I don't think he should get downvoted for being frustrated with American car companies. Toyota starting kicking our ass 35 years ago after the oil embargo in the early 70s. They were complacent and powerless to do anything while they got clamored. I must add however I really think that American manufacturers have stepped up their game in every way: reliability, gas mileage, and design. I've seen cars carrying Ford logos that made me do a double take recently because they actually looked good. While I'm sad to see our car companies struggling, Toyota has done well by us in terms of making affordable, reliable cars, and doing it in the US with American employees. In the end I think the best will be for both of them to survive, because now that American car companies have up-ed their game, Japan and Korea will innovate even more to compete creating a competitive environment that leads to good things for us - the consumers!
JohnnyGTO @ Oct 18th 2008 7:59PM
I think they need to give me one to test in the Arizona desert heat, it's not a dry heat when it makes you sweat so much.
RB @ Oct 18th 2008 8:24PM
I hate to be the kill-joy but we've seen this senario played out in "Who Killed the Electric Car". They know there's a market for the EV why not just sell it? Instead of 500 available to lease, make it 5000 available to buy and move forward with more production based the first year's data. How are we as consumers expected to commit to electric vehicles if the auto makers are only going to dabble in it?
Aside from my gripes with the leasing, I think this would be a great if it were available at $35k and would sell well.
William Randall @ Oct 18th 2008 8:31PM
RB beat me to the punch. All you who are excited about this, I hate to burst your bubble, but they are playing you.
Read closely: LEASE.
Then go rent "Who Killed the Electric Car?"
Valicore @ Oct 18th 2008 8:49PM
Am I the only one who thought this was Google's Android car?
webon @ Oct 19th 2008 1:38AM
yes, ur alone