Volkswagen ID 3 - 2020

[jack_christie]

Due Q1 2020

Pro S has a 550km (342 mile) range.
Pro is 430km.
Standard 330km

around £27,500

The VW ID.3 arrives with a choice of three different battery sizes, with top spec models offering a range of between 242 and 342 miles

This is the Volkswagen ID.3, the German brand’s first purpose-built pure-electric vehicle. It's been revealed on the eve of the 2019 Frankfurt Motor Show, and is a car that bosses admit could be as important as the original Beetle or the Mk1 Golf.

VW’s recent electric cars, the e-Golf and e-up!, have both been based on combustion-engined cars. But the ID.3 marks the debut of the company’s MEB architecture, a bespoke pure-electric platform that will eventually underpin dozens of EVs from VW and family members SEAT, Skoda and Audi.

The ID.3 is being launched in a single ‘1st Edition’ spec with a 201bhp rear-mounted electric motor and a usable battery capacity of 58kWh. VW claims that gives the car a range of between 186 and 261 miles.

https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/2020-volkswagen-id-3

https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/volks...kswagen-id3-electric-car-arrives-at-frankfurt

 

[prizrak]

I like this better than the stupid ass Taken

 

[93Flareside]

Ok, that’s impressive. How the hell have VW done this when it seems nobody has gotten this far with an electric car? I mean this in that it’s not trying to be this crazy show-offy thing like Tesla or etron and Taycan? This is incredible. Though I’d be curious what the performance will be like. Still seems quite better than Chevrolet or nissan’s efforts either.

 

[GRtak]

If it weren't for Tesla, nobody would be doing this(making EVs). And the skateboard thing was already developed by GM, but never implemented in a production vehicle. Rivian also uses a skateboard of sorts.

Remember that this is also being brought to you by the company behind Dieselgate and the attempted cover up that included gassing monkeys.

 

[93Flareside]

If it weren't for Tesla, nobody would be doing this(making EVs). And the skateboard thing was already developed by GM, but never implemented in a production vehicle. Rivian also uses a skateboard of sorts.

Remember that this is also being brought to you by the company behind Dieselgate and the attempted cover up that included gassing monkeys.

Yes and GM owned the patent (so they got money from fuel bought by us) and helped enforce putting lead into our fuel despite people dying from lead fuel production notably those who worked for DuPont. They had a building called The Butterfly House because people were hallucinating so much during their work they thought they saw butterflies. Also, 60% of Dupont’s employee population died from fuel refining.

http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2011/11/why-lead-used-to-be-added-to-gasoline/

 

[GRtak]

You got some of your facts wrong. While DuPont was the original producer, and I am sure they had problems, it was Standard Oil that had the vast majority of it's workforce at a New Jersey plant that were suffering from lead poisoning(80%) and several deaths.

https://www.thenation.com/article/secret-history-lead/

The point I was trying to make, and failed at, was this would not be happening, unless VW was forced into it. They were forced to build an EV charging network here, and promote ZEVs.

Now they are successfully whitewashing their reputation. They are coming off as a forward thinking company for going to EVs. But what really pushed them there is they were forced to figure out a way to profit from their mistakes. You have to hand it to them,they are doing a good job of both.

By the way, I am fully aware that almost every large corporation that came out of the early Twentieth century is going to have a checkered past. If we delve to deeply into the history of any corporation, we may not like the underlying misdeeds that help get it where it is.

 

[leviathan]

Back on topic of the car itself...

I like it a lot. Looks good, especially the interior - I like how they made it very simple, yet didn't overdo it like Tesla with the 3, it still looks like a car interior and not an iPad stuck on a mostly empty dash. Also rear-wheel-drive - makes perfect sense for a bespoke EV, no need to fit the drivetrain in an existing platform (which is how most current FWD EVs came to be) and easier to get that instant torque down.

Now they just need to make a GTI version with more Vmax. Normal ones are limited to 160 km/h - enough for most of the world, but come on, this is a German car, what the hell. Then it comes on the list as something I'd consider having after the 3 eventually goes away... unless I go for another 3

 

[bone]

i realy don't like the design direction they are taken
short, too high, squashed cars with a blunt nose

the trend was started by citroen, but it looks like VW also jumped on the bandwagon

 

[Mitchi]

But I think that is understandeable - don't have a big ICE engine under the bonnet, no need for a long one then ...

 

[bone]

^neither does the aventador

 

[prizrak]

If it weren't for Tesla, nobody would be doing this(making EVs).

EV1 would like a word

The only thing Tesla did right is market EVs as futuristic luxury cars while the rest of the manufacturers always treated them as cheap city runabouts. Considering that EVs are inherently more expensive (at least for now) and require somewhere to charge, preferably at home, they were a terrible choice for that as compared to a subcompact or a hybrid. Making them luxury items allowed for higher pricing and ensured that they would likely go to people who have somewhere to charge. This is why the rest of the manufacturers kind of woke up, they realized they could sell those things for a lot of money instead of losing money on subcompacts no one really bought.

 

[prizrak]

i realy don't like the design direction they are taken
short, too high, squashed cars with a blunt nose

the trend was started by citroen, but it looks like VW also jumped on the bandwagon

Makes sense for a euro car that is meant to navigate tight euro cities though.

 

[Tram]

But I think that is understandeable - don't have a big ICE engine under the bonnet, no need for a long one then ...

Exactly. And as @prizrak said, it probably has a purpose.

And I do believe that form should follow the function. After all, beauty is in our own eyes, what we find aesthetically pleasing is comprised of what are we used to seeing and what we choose to embrace as beautiful. That's why I'd say that EV's need to look radically different (but not just for the sake of looking radically different).

Most of today's cars are designed to follow the simple formula that evolved from the FF or FR layout (which is what most of the cars use today, AWD and 4WD cars being usually derived of those two aforementioned layouts), aerodynamic and safety standards and some cultural influences. At least that's how I understand it. With EV's, designers should, at least in theory, have more freedom while designing cars, so maybe if they stopped imitating ICE-powered cars and brought us something radically new, something that would actually be refreshing?

That being said, I'm split about the design of this. The details irk me (those taillights, e.g., look like they were taken from a pre-production Golf VIII) and it does look a bit conservative. On the other hand, the design seems to follow the purpose, so at least we do have that. I'm still waiting for something that would take my breath in an unconventional way, but this can pass as a good design in my book.

 

[bone]

so maybe if they stopped imitating ICE-powered cars and brought us something radically new, something that would actually be refreshing?

i can't help but fear this is what they'll come up with:

 

[GRtak]

EV1 would like a word

The only thing Tesla did right is market EVs as futuristic luxury cars while the rest of the manufacturers always treated them as cheap city runabouts. Considering that EVs are inherently more expensive (at least for now) and require somewhere to charge, preferably at home, they were a terrible choice for that as compared to a subcompact or a hybrid. Making them luxury items allowed for higher pricing and ensured that they would likely go to people who have somewhere to charge. This is why the rest of the manufacturers kind of woke up, they realized they could sell those things for a lot of money instead of losing money on subcompacts no one really bought.

So, we mostly agree.

Clearly, the EV1 did have an influence on things starting to move on EVs, but GM ran away and nobody else was planning on a new pure EV for public sale (Toyota had the Rav4 EV for fleet sales) after CARB's ZEV mandate was killed off. Not until The Tesla Roadster made EVs look like they could be fun and sexy. Most importantly, Tesla did not stand around waiting for charging stations to be built (GM, looking at you) and did it on their own.This is what made them more practical.

 

[prizrak]

i can't help but fear this is what they'll come up with:

That would never pass crash tests

So, we mostly agree.

Pretty much yeah.

Tesla did not stand around waiting for charging stations to be built (GM, looking at you) and did it on their own

Yep that was a brilliant move by them, if I were them I would open up the Supercharger network to other EVs and use that as a source of revenue.

 

[leviathan]

Yep that was a brilliant move by them, if I were them I would open up the Supercharger network to other EVs and use that as a source of revenue.

They offered it a while back - other manufacturers were invited to join the network, if they share the cost of putting it up and running it. I believe the offer is still on the table, but there are no takers so far.

In Europe, it would even be fairly easy, as all Superchargers are fitted with CCS plugs for the Model 3 anyway. However, for now I believe it can't be done without other manufacturers' active participation, because the Superchargers have no user controls of any kind and thus require the car to authenticate itself to the charger via a standardized protocol over the CCS plug itself (I believe the VIN is used). Apparently, no other vehicles support this kind of auth so far, even though it is part of CCS spec.

Instead the Europeans (and now also Hyundai) are building Ionity, which is also based on CCS of course. With that and the other privately operated networks such as FastNed and Allego, their total coverage is slowly starting to approach the Superchargers.

 

[marcos_eirik]

EV1 would like a word

The only thing Tesla did right is market EVs as futuristic luxury cars while the rest of the manufacturers always treated them as cheap city runabouts. Considering that EVs are inherently more expensive (at least for now) and require somewhere to charge, preferably at home, they were a terrible choice for that as compared to a subcompact or a hybrid. Making them luxury items allowed for higher pricing and ensured that they would likely go to people who have somewhere to charge. This is why the rest of the manufacturers kind of woke up, they realized they could sell those things for a lot of money instead of losing money on subcompacts no one really bought.

Ignoring the Roadster, I would rather say that what set Tesla apart from the beginning, and especially with the Model S was that it was the first BEV that was a full ICE replacement. It was not meant to be a car #2/city car like most BEVs were at the time. I would also say that they were the first BEVs to be designed to look and behave as much as possible like a "normal" car, while being built on a bespoke platform, utilizing all of the benefits this platform allows. Then there's the vertical integration with the Superchargers that are just plug and play; no cards, no RFIDs, just plug it in.

Everyone I know who have made the switch were very skeptical of BEVs at first, but they absolutely don't want to go back now. The luxury of starting every journey with a "full tank", as well as the silly low running costs are very hard to let go of. In Norway they are completely tax exempt, even VAT (sales tax) so the only cost is wear and tear and depreciation. If you charge it at home it's silly cheap to run. My parents for instance, have not noticed any appreciable increase in utility costs after they bought the Model S in 2013 and upgraded to Model X in 2017.

On to the subject of the VW ID I think it looks very promising. Good range and built on a bespoke platform. It also shows that VW is dead serious about BEVs. It is great that they have understood that it will not work to just slam a large battery pack underneath an SUV and call it a day. They have also declared that they will invest massively in battery production, which will be needed for the volumes they'd need to sell these at for them to make them money. It will be a great seller here, that is guaranteed.

It is also good that the Ionity-network is expanding, only problem I can see is that most Ionity-chargers have fairly few charging stalls, only 4-8 stalls here, while Tesla Superchargers tend to have at least 20 stalls in most places, in some high demand spots they have almost 50 stalls. This is fine, as long as few cars are compatible, but can be a pain when deliveries of these start, as well as deliveries of I-Pace, E-Tron and EQC ramps up, and deliveries of the Taycan starts.

 

[prizrak]

Model S was that it was the first BEV that was a full ICE replacement.

It wasn't and isn't. It has enough range for a typical daily commuter but is not something that could do a proper road trip. Additionally it is still reliant on charging point either at home or some frequent destination. As an example despite being well within it's driving range for my normal car use and having off street parking I couldn't own one simply because I have no way of charging it outside of a super charger and <5 mins at the pump > 30+ mins at a supercharger thats about half hour away.

 

[marcos_eirik]

It wasn't and isn't. It has enough range for a typical daily commuter but is not something that could do a proper road trip. Additionally it is still reliant on charging point either at home or some frequent destination. As an example despite being well within it's driving range for my normal car use and having off street parking I couldn't own one simply because I have no way of charging it outside of a super charger and <5 mins at the pump > 30+ mins at a supercharger thats about half hour away.

I disagree, however I should have added that it has probably worked like that for about 99 % of it's users. I have done several road trips in Norway (400-600km/day) in both the old S (and my brother's new-ish S) and the X, both summer and winter, no problems. On a long journey one or two charging stops a day would usually do, 30-35 minutes (for one, 15-ish for the other) at the Supercharger is usually more than enough, that gives me (and my passengers) the time to have a restroom-break, a snack/coffee etc. Sometimes the charging stop meant dinner, by which time the car was done charging to full long before we had finished our meals. Most places I have stayed over night have also offered some sort of slow charging, so you almost always start the next day with a full charge. This is very comfortably done now, with the charging infrastructure we currently have, and it's only getting better.

The cherry on the top is that the driving cost of the trip is next to nothing (S and X has free Supercharger use)

On the subject of charging at home, I am of the opinion that car ownership means that you should also have somewhere (that isn't the street) to park the car at home, if you have that, it's also likely you can also have equipment to charge it there. Relying on street parking is way too unreliable in my opinion, you never know if there is an open spot close to your home, and there is a greater risk of vandalism and theft, which means more expensive insurance etc. Especially here where the city council has removed about 50 % of the available street parking over the last five years, it gets difficult. Also, parking garage/space providers are now required by law to offer spots with charging infrastructure.