Speculative article on 2024 SE

In a bit of a pickle for the US market, just as they describe. The change in rebates made that even more complicated. No doubt this changes their plans. Of the options I’d almost prefer the F56 BEV to G66 BEV rebrand route. Ideally iterative BEV improvements with some generational substance.

Worst case in my eyes would be next gen styling with cuurent gen everything else.
 
From the article:
"The pace of adoption of electric vehicles increased beyond expectations and sales of the electric F56 have been far better than expected."​

Another data point that the SE is a hit, despite all the press complaining about range. And if the F56 platform is going to last another decade, hopefully that should mean the current SE will continue to be available.
 
CuriousGeorge said:
https://www.motoringfile.com/2022/0...-electric-mini-could-still-make-it-to-the-us/

Tidbits I hadn't seen before:

1) confirmation (?) that MINI is apparently still undecided as to whether to bring the next-gen car to the US;

2) chassis designations for it and the ICE version/lookalike;

3) longer life for ICE platform (10 y) than I thought was the case.
Click to expand...
BMW I 3 was design as chassis should last for 40 years as carbon fiber but it last only 8 years bc was so expensive to build and in July 2022 they quit to build that expensive futuristic car .I was happy to drive I 3 for 6 years.
 
What’s to keep MINI from simply continuing to produce the current SE at the Oxford factory for the EU, UK, and USA markets? And allowing the China factory to supply the GW SE to Asian and Indian markets?


Sent from my iPhone using Inside EVs
 
Jim In Tucson said:
What’s to keep MINI from simply continuing to produce the current SE at the Oxford factory for the EU, UK, and USA markets? And allowing the China factory to supply the GW SE to Asian and Indian markets?
Click to expand...

That's what i was thinking also. This would be the easiest way to proceed until some better plan was developed.
 
MB (with Stellantis) just secured 10,000 tons of Canadian lithium hydroxide. BMW hasn’t announced anything similar yet.
 
Jim In Tucson said:
What’s to keep MINI from simply continuing to produce the current SE at the Oxford factory for the EU, UK, and USA markets? And allowing the China factory to supply the GW SE to Asian and Indian markets?
Click to expand...

That seems unlikely to me. First, it would require delaying introduction of the next-gen ICE as well. Second, although the SE has done surprisingly well (20% of all 2-doors is what I read), it's still small potatoes compared to the rest of MINI's offerings. Third, at least in the US sales are likely to decline due to the IRA. Finally, the whole point of collaborating with Great Wall was to reduce the cost of EV production (implying that they aren't making a lot in the current vehicle).

Given all of these factors, it would be easier to simply to just stop selling the SE in the US.
 
Puppethead said:
if the F56 platform is going to last another decade.
Click to expand...

Just to be clear, it's not. The F56 platform has been described as "modular", allowing it to morph into the smaller G66 (thus allowing the next-gen ICE to at least visually match the altered dimensions - i.e., shorter-but-wider, with reduced overhangs, especially in front - of the next-gen EV).
 
I just learned the new California directive eliminating ICE vehicle sales by 2030 includes provisions that BEVs must get 150 mile range minimum. Either the battery technology has to get better or our beloved SE would have to get heavier. If it stays available. Since California is the fifth-largest economy in the world this will upend the entire automative industry.

Here are specifics the article points out:
  • EVs must come with a charging cord.
  • Adapters must be available for standardized public chargers (e.g., Tesla’s upcoming CCS adapter).
  • Used vehicles must have battery health metrics so buyers know what they’re getting.
  • Batteries must hold 70% of range for 10 years/150K miles (80% after 2030 model year)
  • Warranties must guarantee 70% of battery capacity for 8 years/100K miles (75% in 2031 model year).
  • EV repair information must be disclosed to independent repair shops.
  • EVs will also have a minimum battery size of 150 miles.
 
Puppethead said:
I just learned the new California directive eliminating ICE vehicle sales by 2030 includes provisions that BEVs must get 150 mile range minimum. Either the battery technology has to get better or our beloved SE would have to get heavier. If it stays available. Since California is the fifth-largest economy in the world this will upend the entire automative industry.

Here are specifics the article points out:
  • EVs must come with a charging cord.
  • Adapters must be available for standardized public chargers (e.g., Tesla’s upcoming CCS adapter).
  • Used vehicles must have battery health metrics so buyers know what they’re getting.
  • Batteries must hold 70% of range for 10 years/150K miles (80% after 2030 model year)
  • Warranties must guarantee 70% of battery capacity for 8 years/100K miles (75% in 2031 model year).
  • EV repair information must be disclosed to independent repair shops.
  • EVs will also have a minimum battery size of 150 miles.
Click to expand...
As you driving 500 miles a week if you retired in 10 years your range in SE could be 50 miles you can move to California from cold climate and still use a SE for daily shores for next 10 years . Bc I’m retired my SE is use very little but my recent I 3 was promised by BMW can last. 16 years with at least 50 miles range which was good for me unfortunately I sold a car and as mechanic I don’t want to spread a rumor what was wrong with it .as SE have a same motor or they improve we will by ok. I fought my I3 will be retirement car which I like a lot but is not I bought SE as replacement.Owning a lots of cars for 55 years an SE is taking a first place to drive that Mini bullet 22caliber.In my household is still ACE car 2019 Subaru Forester for all heavy tusks.
 
The fact is the California “ban” on ICE vehicles isn’t a ban at all as PHEV’s are allowed. I doubt you’d find any non PHEV ICE vehicles by then anyway.
It *should* be a ban on new ICE vehicles in all forms by 2035 and a ban on non PHEVs long before that, 2027 at least.
 
AndysComputer said:
The fact is the California “ban” on ICE vehicles isn’t a ban at all as PHEV’s are allowed. I doubt you’d find any non PHEV ICE vehicles by then anyway.
It *should* be a ban on new ICE vehicles in all forms by 2035 and a ban on non PHEVs long before that, 2027 at least.
Click to expand...
Sadly, the two longest-EV-range PHEVs, my Accord-sized Clarity PHEV (47 EPA miles) and the smaller Chevy Volt (53 EPA miles), were discontinued. They are both great cars, but, unfortunately, they are cars, not SUVs or pickup trucks, so sales lagged.
 
AndysComputer said:
The fact is the California “ban” on ICE vehicles isn’t a ban at all as PHEV’s are allowed. I doubt you’d find any non PHEV ICE vehicles by then anyway.
It *should* be a ban on new ICE vehicles in all forms by 2035 and a ban on non PHEVs long before that, 2027 at least.
Click to expand...
The new CARB rules state that no more that 20% of sales can PHEV by 2035. And those PHEVs need at least 50 miles of electric range so most daily driving will be in EV mode.

Government mandates like this need to be realistic and give industry time to accommodate or they will just plain fail. A 2027 mandate would be impossible as it takes more than 5 years to design a new drivetrain from scratch.
 
Torrey said:
The new CARB rules state that no more that 20% of sales can PHEV by 2035. And those PHEVs need at least 50 miles of electric range so most daily driving will be in EV mode.

Government mandates like this need to be realistic and give industry time to accommodate or they will just plain fail. A 2027 mandate would be impossible as it takes more than 5 years to design a new drivetrain from scratch.
Click to expand...
True, PHEV SUVs and pickup trucks that can go 50 miles on battery power don't exist. It's too bad Chevy sold the factory that made their Cruise/Volt cars. The Volt's 53-mile EV-range drivetrain was around for years and would have qualified under the new CARB rules.
 
Toyotas come pretty close already, though. My next door neighbors got an NX450h+ (that’s a mouthful!) a couple weeks before my SE arrived, and hasn’t bothered to get a level-2 charger installed because 12-hours off a 120 outlet and they are off to the races for another week of trips to the flea market and garden center. He reckons he easily gets 70 km on battery alone — 42 miles — despite the heft of this large crossover.
 
SameGuy said:
Toyotas come pretty close already, though. My next door neighbors got an NX450h+ (that’s a mouthful!) a couple weeks before my SE arrived, and hasn’t bothered to get a level-2 charger installed because 12-hours off a 120 outlet and they are off to the races for another week of trips to the flea market and garden center. He reckons he easily gets 70 km on battery alone — 42 miles — despite the heft of this large crossover.
Click to expand...
Good to know that a fully loaded $80,000 Lexus NX450h+ also qualifies for the full $5,000 federal iZEV rebate AND $5,000 Quebec PHEV rebate.
 
Torrey said:
The new CARB rules state that no more that 20% of sales can PHEV by 2035. And those PHEVs need at least 50 miles of electric range so most daily driving will be in EV mode.

Government mandates like this need to be realistic and give industry time to accommodate or they will just plain fail. A 2027 mandate would be impossible as it takes more than 5 years to design a new drivetrain from scratch.
Click to expand...

it does not take more than 5 years as I have a friend who works in Fords drivetrain development division in Europe. This of course on the assumption that they don’t design a new combustion engine to go with it (and no-one should be designing new combustions at this rage in the game).
In any case it does not take 13 years and cars with sufficient battery range should arrive in the market now well before 2035.
Believe you me, with the risk of loss of access to the California market car companies will get off their *** and move quicker.
That said, this rule should have been announced a couple of years ago. It is too little too late.
13 years from now they should all be full battery electric. There is no reason to still be selling PHEVs in 2035.
I’d be happy with a sliding scale on the range between now and 2030 but no way should ICE vehicles be on the market in California in 2035.
I was a big fan of the Volt but that was years ago. There was need for such a vehicle back the due to the cost of batteries and a lack of infrastructure. Now that need is debatable but with the way the market is going already by 2035 they are not needed.
Car companies who can’t make it by then will and should be replaced by those that can, including vehicles from China. No attempt should be made to prop up those who caught this every step of the way. Good bye and good riddance to them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top