Rumor: BMW Vision Concept to be labeled as BMW i8 – We’re not sold on it

Featured Posts, Rumors | December 27th, 2010 by 43
BMW Vision EfficientDynamics 0721 750x500

The BMW world of forums and discussion boards are mulling today over a rumor sent out in the wild by the usual suspect, known as …

The BMW world of forums and discussion boards are mulling today over a rumor sent out in the wild by the usual suspect, known as Scott27, one of the longest BMW insiders we have seen on the interwebs.

The rumor goes something like this: BMW will introduce the Vision Concept to the world as the BMW i8.

During this time, BMW will bring forth its philosophy with such groundbreaking concepts such as the BMW MegaCity Vehicle and BMW i8. Which is the term for the production car of the Vision Efficient Dynamics concept car.

A fair assumption, isn’t it? Especially since BMW has recently filled for the “BMW i” trademarks and logos, a new sub-brand that will host the vehicles coming out of the Project i umbrella.

But why i8 and not i1 or any other naming convention starting with “i”? Well, one old dog in the BMW world would say the Munich automaker is looking to somewhat revive the memory of their never launched supercar, M8, especially since BMW sees the Vision Concept as being the next breakthrough in the supercar segment.

BMW Vision EfficientDynamics 0721 655x436So i8 makes perfect sense then…

But here is where our balanced judgment and non-fanboyism kicks in. First, BMW sees the VED car as more of an efficient, yet fun to drive sportscar, a new piece of technology that breaks the stereotype of a high-end sportscar – big engines, high revs and lots of ponies coming from under the hood. So would the i8 compare to the M8 concept? Or even the high-end 8 Series? We don’t think so. Two different cars, for two different decades.

Second, in a recent conversation with BMW engineers responsible for the development of VED, we learned a production model won’t come on the market until 2014, which tells us a world debut will occur in late 2013. This is exactly three years from now and we are certainly inclined to believe that BMW has yet to decide on the exact naming convention. Based on our experience and inside information, we know BMW usually goes through a process where customer focus groups are formed and the results from these surveys weigh heavily in the naming convention for some of their models. Therefore, in our opinion and ours solely, we believe the VED badge has not been yet decided on. Sure, i8 or i100 (Read our editorial: “Why the i100?”) or other names we have heard are still on the table, and yes, most likely an “i” will be involved in the label, but for now, we label the BMW i8 as simply a rumor that none of our other sources were rushing to confirm.

As always, we will update you as we learn more…for now, we were simply looking to set the story straight.

43 responses to “Rumor: BMW Vision Concept to be labeled as BMW i8 – We’re not sold on it”

  1. X5SoB says:

    i ate and i ate ’til i couldn’t eat anymore… ;)
    Honestly, this would be an extremely unimaginative name for a very emotional vehicle. It may work as a prefix, as in i8 Vision. Pure speculation, of course.

  2. Clinton says:

    I just want to see this vehicle with a proper paint job already

    • Laszlo says:

      and some real tires not the ones that was stolen off of the security guards bicycle.
      concept or not the car has so many weak points, hard to imagine 3 years from now it will be sold for 200k USD.

      Maybe BMW knows something and we don’t ! Maybe 200grand will buy you a loaded civic by then ? Then the price structure makes a lot more sense.

      • Horatiu B. says:

        The tires will still be fairly narrow, max 215. I learned that during the test drive in Leipzig.

      • wazon8 says:

        Man, you completely ignore how technologically advanced this car will be. You focused on some unimportant issues and compare it to civic. That’s exciting point how will it be able to take corners fast while having so norrow tires? There need to be something with aerodynamics, suspension and chassis at stake. But for you there is nothing interesting in this solutions, you want rather wide tires. How old are you?

        • Laszlo says:

          I compared it to the Civic as a price point. Retard read the post 1st.

          Yes , the car does look stupid with the details such as tires, doors, etc.

          remember the Z9 ? The BMW Press said – don’t look at the ugly trunk, its a concept, look at the technological advance and the shape etc.

          What happened to that bungled trunk ? it was on every single car for the next few years. People hated that but BMW did it anyway. Bungle screwed up the design but it did not matter.

          so I still say this – if a concept can not be an absolute eye opening wonderful design then the production car will disappoint you more. When creating a concept the artist hands are not held back. They can do whatever they want.
          Production car will be limited with cost cutting, service requirements, actual availability, etc.

          So if this is the best BMW can do at the moment and want 200k for it in a few years then I think it is a disappointing machine.
          The details are weak – like the paint job, doors, tires, etc. The decent shape and electrical gismo’s won’t convince me about a car. I could care less about electric engines. I hate all of them.
          I will most likely never buy an electric only vehicle. A hybrid might if I will have no choice. But since we have more oil then we need for 1000years I can see the next 100 years will be still gas powered cars not these electric toys.

          at 200k price range a customer will want more then aerodynamics, suspension and chassis… they want prestige, they want look and style yet some practicality (whats up with those doors ? )
          This car as it sits is missing a lot of these elements.

          needs a complete make-over.

          • wazon8 says:

            “at 200k price range a customer will want more then aerodynamics, suspension and chassis… they want prestige, they want look and style yet some practicality (whats up with those doors ? )” I guess you made some sociological research and you are sure that efficiency counts for nothing in societies that are sick because of ecology. They need wide tires and normal doors, except the fact that most of people, who are not so interested in car industry, like this door and overall look of the car and that it’s pretty irrational to feel so tight to wide tires.

            Paint job is poor? Maybe because it has camouflage on it? Don’t you know that this psycho shapes cover details? Navies use this kid of paint job in order to hide details of their ships. If someone is retard here, it’s you who take camouflage as real paint job.

            And where the hell did you read that we have oil for 1000years and that we will run 100 years with no problems. That’s something in contradiction with BP’s reports that we’ve got oil for 50 years, if we will keep using it in amount we used to. And still some find it too optimistic, since it included some probable sources of oil. Saudi Arabia started pomping water into their biggest oil field Ghawar in order to make pressure bigger. But it also shows that this source is getting to be empty and they will have a problem with replacing it by some other fields. Needless to say that Saudi Arabia is the biggest supplier of oil on the world and when Ghawar will get empty, the prices will go up, up and up. In 100 years, probably the closest thing to regular combustion engine will be some version of hybrid, if such things will be avaible at all.

          • viper says:

            this car sucks. a fool can see that. sadly wazon cant.

          • wazon8 says:

            Yeah, make a classical supercar and say that’s new direction of industry! How many times does it need to be repeated when you finally get the point of this car? Sorry, perhaps I’m wrong, it’s point is to have as wide tires as possible, then it would be truely modern car. Some of you should read press realese of this car again. It’s as if one complains that 1-er is not 7-er. It’s surely not, but was it supposed to be one? Was this i8 supposed to be a supercar? Or rather embodiment of Efficient Dynamics idea? And why will BMW create 450hp M-version of it? Perhaps, because they want to make regular supercar, which i8 is not.

          • wazon8 says:

            Moreover, this car “sucks” and each car maker tries to create something similar to it. Who does suck then?

          • X5SoB says:

            Wazon8, the concept of this vehicle goes right over the heads of these two little boys, they really don’t get it at all. Laszlo and viper are infantile and moronic, and think big fat wheels increase efficiency. I seriously doubt they even have the funds to buy a premium car, unless they inherited it. They certainly don’t have the intelligence to earn good money!

          • Doug says:

            Laszlo, why do you hate electric motors? Can you elaborate?

            It seems to be that electric batteries aren’t a winning proposition and don’t accomplish their implied goal. That’s not to say that better storage technologies aren’t coming (or have been here for 20 years: porsche 918?). But is this your gripe with electric motors?

    • bob says:

      Look at the photos when it first debuted then…

  3. viper says:

    that car looks stupid with those tiny tires. it looks horrible.

  4. bmwFan says:

    that car looks like a stupid prius headon with those slim tires. if they charge 200k for it, only retards will buy it for that price.

  5. BIMMER1 says:

    I just wish BMW would stop referring to this car as a “supercar”. A $200k car with M3 performance is not a supercar by any means. If it was a $200k car that had the same performance as a 911 turbo, then it would at least be more worthy of that tag. As it was in the past with the M1, BMW is selling themselves short and is going to end up with another car that only they think is super.

    Skinny tires = less rolling resistance which = better fuel economy. This car is more about efficiency and less about performance. Just one more reason why it is not a supercar. Supercars are all about performance without compromise. This car compromises performance for efficiency, so again it’s not a supercar. Yes it’s innovative, cutting edge, and also looks the part. But the fact is it’s just not worthy of being labeled a supercar. The Porsche 918 will be a supercar, as it has the performance to back it up. 718 combined horsepower and 0-62mph in 3.2 seconds. Now that’s a supercar. BMW thinks 0-62 in 4.7 is the same as 3.2? Those cars aren’t even close in performance, and BMW should be hanging their head low knowing that they are selling themselves and their loyal followers way short on this one.

    • X5SoB says:

      I agree, this is not a Supercar in the classic sense of the word, and BMW would do well not to call it that. It will be a super efficient car, and given this mission, it having the performance of an M3 is nothing short of awesome. Maybe they should call it an Awesomecar!

  6. Doug says:

    By the way, has anyone figured out how to open the windows on the Vision?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.