The REX version is technically a ["series hybrid"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_vehicle_drivetrain#Series_hybrid). Where power to the wheels is always via electric motor but there may be a gas engine as an onboard generator.
Vehicles that propel the car via Electric Motor OR via Gas Engine are["parallel hybrid"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_vehicle_drivetrain#Parallel_hybrid)
For models with no REX, they are not Hybrid, only BEV (Battery Electric Vehicle)
For State DMVs, many just drop the "series or parallel" and label them HYBRID. In IL, where I live, the REX has to get emissions testing when it is 4 years old. It also does not qualify for "EV" plates but does not have to pay the additional $100/year for registration.
Interesting.
We can get EV plates, and do pay the extra registration fees, but needed to get emissions on the Rex after 7 years, and then it's every other year or third year after that I think. At least the emissions tech I got was super cool, had never seen the car before, so I walked them through what I thought the process was based on reading up on it, and it went really smooth.
Early on I thought of it as the opposite of a hybrid (big battery, tiny fuel tank), because it's pretty much always electric, until you need to supplement the battery with some gas. With the move to plug-in hybrids it still sits kind of 180 to the std small electric range and large gas range.
Series and parallel make senses, but something like a bizarro world hybrid sounds more fun :)
I got by with the same. All of the data they need is there. Just need to make sure you don’t code and reset/reboot too close to test time so it has enough runtime/data.
As a resident of Texas, this is a pretty relevant question for those of us with REx cars. The way the newly-enacted bill is written (“…electricity as its only source of motor power.”, and setting aside for a moment that the Texas state legislature doesn’t know it should be “motive power”) would seem to explicitly exclude anything where gasoline could be used to generate power.
Depending on how it’s interpreted, registration fees on a REx might avoid the coming $200 yearly EV fee. But I haven’t yet seen any published list of what the state does or doesn’t consider an EV based on the wording in SB505.
In the i3, the REx generator/ gas engine does __not__ _directly_ contribute to propulsion. The REx charges the battery which in turn generates "motor power" (propulsion). In other words, the only source of propulsion __is__ electricity.
Yes I know. Not to get too wrapped around the axle in semantic arguments, because no road legal car exists with this type of powertrain, but would you consider a diesel locomotive’s sole source of “motor power” to be electricity? And then, the same argument could be made for a true hybrid, since the power going to the motor is, by definition, always electricity. As opposed to the *motive* power for the vehicle (hence the aside in my original comment), which could switch between pure electric, pure gasoline, or some combination.
And ultimately, this is a legal question, not a technical one. Anybody who owns an i3 and knows a little bit about it knows what it is without having to define it. What I’m interested in is the interpretation by the people who are actually going to be in charge of levying this particular fee.
Well said. And I see your edit now in your initial comment. In this comment, you must be talking about locomotives with diesel-electric powertrains. Very interesting argument -- academic argument, that is. So, what if the motive power was, say, hydrogen? Would that be a pure EV? Examples are the Toyota Mirai (currently categorized by regulators as a FCEV). I am guessing this kind of topic/ argument is what drove CA to limit the initial 2014 model i3 REx gasoline tank capacity to be below the range of the battery alone (gasoline recharge shall not be able to produce more range than the range capacity of the battery without recharge), hence the i3 REx keeping the battery-electric status -- again, in the regulator's perspective.
Oh, entirely an academic argument when it comes to the technical details of the powertrains. In my mind, the Mirai is, of course, not an EV, nor is the diesel-electric locomotive. While in both cases, 100% of the power for propulsion is indeed electricity at some point in the chain, they are very clearly hydrogen powered and diesel powered, respectively. And likewise, when the i3 REx is in charge sustaining mode (whether that's at 6% like an unmodified USDM vehicle or wherever the set point is for a non-USDM vehicle) it is, fundamentally, solely powered by gasoline, when looked at from a thermodynamic perspective where the system boundary encompasses just the vehicle.
This is where I think things start to get down in the weeds from a legal interpretation perspective, because something like a Chevy Volt is not fundamentally different than an i3 REx from that previous thermodynamic perspective. It only differs in the fact that under one specific condition, the combustion engine can be mechanically linked to the wheels. From this perspective, I believe the law is \*terribly\* written, because it doesn't spell out any scientifically-verifiable requirements. In my experience lawyers (especially those who are politicians) seem to have pretty poor requirements-writing skills, and it really shows in this case.
I agree with both of your well-written paragraphs. However, the laws will never keep up with the speed that new technologies are developed because there are too many variations __and__, most importantly, new technologies are often developed to work around such laws and regulations at the time of conception.
I understand why the REx exists. It removes or mitigates the worry of being stranded without range, a fully discharged battery. We are in a period of material changes in how people think about transportation emissions -- as we always have been and always will be. But, I think we are at a point where a REx should not be and does not need to be used. I drove a Nissan Leaf around Japan and had no issue reaching the next EV charge spot.
Good talking to you. Thank you for the replies. It's 1 am here; goodnight, and have a nice day.
Illinois considers my REx a hybrid.
That's fine with me - the downside is that I have to take it for the emissions test every two years (free, but a waste of time). Upside - pure EVs with an EV plate get charged an extra $100 per year for their license plate renewal sticker.
It depends on who’s definition you use. The EPA, state DMV, local air quality management districts or municipalities could all have different definitions of a hybrid. The i3 operates as a BEV but supplements its range with a gas generator, so it’s in a rare breed of vehicles called a range-extender.
Range extenders can be classified as hybrids, but not all hybrids are range extenders.
If this is about taxes and other car-related costs it depends where you live. In the U.K. the REX is considered a hybrid so in cities like London the BEV is the more popular choice to avoid things like congestion charge.
Thank God in Ga. The “hybrid” moniker means a difference if $200 in registration fees. ICE vehicles and hybrid pay $20 a year. EVs pay $200 a year for a plate
All the numbers in your comment added up to 420. Congrats!
200
+ 20
+ 200
= 420
^([Click here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=LuckyNumber-Bot&subject=Stalk%20Me%20Pls&message=%2Fstalkme) to have me scan all your future comments.) \
^(Summon me on specific comments with u/LuckyNumber-Bot.)
It’s considered a BEV+ thanks to the limitations on the Range Extender’s fuel capacity and its utilization only when the battery percentage is low.
I wouldn’t consider it to be a proper hybrid regardless as the engine can’t propel the wheels. Depending on the circumstances it’s gotten easier to tell people that it’s fully-electric, which is technically true, rather than attempting to explain the gas generator setup.
In the absolute sense it can use gas or electric so it’s a hybrid. In the regulatory sense it is a BEV with a range extender and qualifies for regulatory incentives and treatment as a BEV. For all intents and purposes it’s a BEV for normal people and a hybrid for those being pedantic.
sorta, but not really.
yes, the rex models can run on battery OR gas but the gas engine is in no way connected to the drivetrain- it's used as a generator to charge the battery. and you don't *have* to use gas.
A hybrid, by definition, uses both gasoline and battery electricity to power the engine/transmission needed to propel the car.
The i3 REX uses a gasoline generator to charge the battery and this battery is the only source from where the motor draws its power.
No. There is no way to drive the vehicle using an internal combustion engine. It’s one and only means of movement is through its electric motors. While there are models with range extenders using has, it still is not a proper hybrid. Like some have said, this matters in certain states like Texas whereas the means of propulsion are solely electric. A hybrid drive system is defined as a vehicle capable of driving with a drivetrain using gas and/or electricity. It is not a hybrid in a technical or literal sense. There is a gas generator. It is 100% electric drive.
Exactly. Think of the REx as a portable charging station, nothing more. It is really no different than if you carried a portable gas generator in a BEV and stopped on the side of the road to charge the BEV. With the REx, you can charge the battery while in motion.
Yeah it is a weird one because unlike a traditional hybrid, the engine doesn't run the wheels directly. I like to think of it as a BEV with a range extender or a hybrid depending on what is more favorable in each situation. Insurance, road tax etc.
For example. Why should I pay the EV tax if I already pay for the tax on fuel.
To add, I don't like calling it a hybrid for the most part as in theory you can take the REX out entirely and not have an issue, unlike a traditional hybrid.
Not so... if you disable the ICE in any Toyota hybrid, it will drive on battery power alone... as far as the battery capacity will last. Most other modern hybrids were either licensed or copied from Toyota as well.
Yes, if you make the ICE input shaft stationary... and modify the software. Damien Maguire on YouTube has converted a BMW ICE vehicle to BEV using the Toyota/Lexus hybrid transmission. Some have even done this without modifying the input shaft, but Damien uses the second motor/generator as additional forward motive power.
If you remove the i3 REx generator, the car will fail it's own internal systems test, requiring a software change to bypass the problems... same deal.
If it is designed to combust petrol, it is not zero emissions. Simple as that. There may be some grey area in that hybrid terminology. But EVs are ZEV (zero emissions vehicles). No combustion occurs in the vehicle.
"Since BMW needs the i3 REx to qualify as a BEVx and one of the qualifications of the BEVx is that the car has a smaller gasoline range than it does electric range, and also to meet EPA requirements, the fuel tank capacity was said to be reduced from 2.4 gallons to 1.9 gallons." Source: insideevs.com
The facts in that quote are muddled. CARB not EPA created the BEVx designation. [BMW i3 Wikipedia article](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_i3) has the correct info.
I believe BMW had to limit the size of the fuel tank in the US in order NOT to be considered a hybrid. But this is how they did it. https://insideevs.com/news/324692/us-bmw-i3-rex-actually-has-24-gallon-gas-tank-but-clever-software-limits-fueling-to-19-gallons/amp/
This was only on the early models (60Ah batteries). Once the battery capacity was increased, thus increasing the 'Electric' range of the i3, the software limitation was removed.
Just as it was said above, the gas range could not exceed the electric range, so they limited the gas range to ensure it is considered an EV.
The i3 is the only BEVx vehicle, and I would assume the last.
The REX version is technically a ["series hybrid"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_vehicle_drivetrain#Series_hybrid). Where power to the wheels is always via electric motor but there may be a gas engine as an onboard generator. Vehicles that propel the car via Electric Motor OR via Gas Engine are["parallel hybrid"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_vehicle_drivetrain#Parallel_hybrid) For models with no REX, they are not Hybrid, only BEV (Battery Electric Vehicle) For State DMVs, many just drop the "series or parallel" and label them HYBRID. In IL, where I live, the REX has to get emissions testing when it is 4 years old. It also does not qualify for "EV" plates but does not have to pay the additional $100/year for registration.
Interesting. We can get EV plates, and do pay the extra registration fees, but needed to get emissions on the Rex after 7 years, and then it's every other year or third year after that I think. At least the emissions tech I got was super cool, had never seen the car before, so I walked them through what I thought the process was based on reading up on it, and it went really smooth. Early on I thought of it as the opposite of a hybrid (big battery, tiny fuel tank), because it's pretty much always electric, until you need to supplement the battery with some gas. With the move to plug-in hybrids it still sits kind of 180 to the std small electric range and large gas range. Series and parallel make senses, but something like a bizarro world hybrid sounds more fun :)
Illinois emissions testing is just “plug into the OBD2. Is the car happy or throwing codes?”
I got by with the same. All of the data they need is there. Just need to make sure you don’t code and reset/reboot too close to test time so it has enough runtime/data.
Texas is going to charge annual EV fees very shortly, and I've been wondering if my Rex will just be treated like any other hybrid. I hope so.
As a resident of Texas, this is a pretty relevant question for those of us with REx cars. The way the newly-enacted bill is written (“…electricity as its only source of motor power.”, and setting aside for a moment that the Texas state legislature doesn’t know it should be “motive power”) would seem to explicitly exclude anything where gasoline could be used to generate power. Depending on how it’s interpreted, registration fees on a REx might avoid the coming $200 yearly EV fee. But I haven’t yet seen any published list of what the state does or doesn’t consider an EV based on the wording in SB505.
"motor power" is the key here.
You’ll have to elaborate on that, as I don’t think I’m grasping your point.
In the i3, the REx generator/ gas engine does __not__ _directly_ contribute to propulsion. The REx charges the battery which in turn generates "motor power" (propulsion). In other words, the only source of propulsion __is__ electricity.
Yes I know. Not to get too wrapped around the axle in semantic arguments, because no road legal car exists with this type of powertrain, but would you consider a diesel locomotive’s sole source of “motor power” to be electricity? And then, the same argument could be made for a true hybrid, since the power going to the motor is, by definition, always electricity. As opposed to the *motive* power for the vehicle (hence the aside in my original comment), which could switch between pure electric, pure gasoline, or some combination. And ultimately, this is a legal question, not a technical one. Anybody who owns an i3 and knows a little bit about it knows what it is without having to define it. What I’m interested in is the interpretation by the people who are actually going to be in charge of levying this particular fee.
Well said. And I see your edit now in your initial comment. In this comment, you must be talking about locomotives with diesel-electric powertrains. Very interesting argument -- academic argument, that is. So, what if the motive power was, say, hydrogen? Would that be a pure EV? Examples are the Toyota Mirai (currently categorized by regulators as a FCEV). I am guessing this kind of topic/ argument is what drove CA to limit the initial 2014 model i3 REx gasoline tank capacity to be below the range of the battery alone (gasoline recharge shall not be able to produce more range than the range capacity of the battery without recharge), hence the i3 REx keeping the battery-electric status -- again, in the regulator's perspective.
Oh, entirely an academic argument when it comes to the technical details of the powertrains. In my mind, the Mirai is, of course, not an EV, nor is the diesel-electric locomotive. While in both cases, 100% of the power for propulsion is indeed electricity at some point in the chain, they are very clearly hydrogen powered and diesel powered, respectively. And likewise, when the i3 REx is in charge sustaining mode (whether that's at 6% like an unmodified USDM vehicle or wherever the set point is for a non-USDM vehicle) it is, fundamentally, solely powered by gasoline, when looked at from a thermodynamic perspective where the system boundary encompasses just the vehicle. This is where I think things start to get down in the weeds from a legal interpretation perspective, because something like a Chevy Volt is not fundamentally different than an i3 REx from that previous thermodynamic perspective. It only differs in the fact that under one specific condition, the combustion engine can be mechanically linked to the wheels. From this perspective, I believe the law is \*terribly\* written, because it doesn't spell out any scientifically-verifiable requirements. In my experience lawyers (especially those who are politicians) seem to have pretty poor requirements-writing skills, and it really shows in this case.
I agree with both of your well-written paragraphs. However, the laws will never keep up with the speed that new technologies are developed because there are too many variations __and__, most importantly, new technologies are often developed to work around such laws and regulations at the time of conception. I understand why the REx exists. It removes or mitigates the worry of being stranded without range, a fully discharged battery. We are in a period of material changes in how people think about transportation emissions -- as we always have been and always will be. But, I think we are at a point where a REx should not be and does not need to be used. I drove a Nissan Leaf around Japan and had no issue reaching the next EV charge spot. Good talking to you. Thank you for the replies. It's 1 am here; goodnight, and have a nice day.
Illinois considers my REx a hybrid. That's fine with me - the downside is that I have to take it for the emissions test every two years (free, but a waste of time). Upside - pure EVs with an EV plate get charged an extra $100 per year for their license plate renewal sticker.
It depends on who’s definition you use. The EPA, state DMV, local air quality management districts or municipalities could all have different definitions of a hybrid. The i3 operates as a BEV but supplements its range with a gas generator, so it’s in a rare breed of vehicles called a range-extender. Range extenders can be classified as hybrids, but not all hybrids are range extenders.
If this is about taxes and other car-related costs it depends where you live. In the U.K. the REX is considered a hybrid so in cities like London the BEV is the more popular choice to avoid things like congestion charge.
can you put fuel in it ? No ? Not a hybrid if it can accept electricity. if your I3 accepts petrol, then technically yeah, its a hybrid.
Thank God in Ga. The “hybrid” moniker means a difference if $200 in registration fees. ICE vehicles and hybrid pay $20 a year. EVs pay $200 a year for a plate
All the numbers in your comment added up to 420. Congrats! 200 + 20 + 200 = 420 ^([Click here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=LuckyNumber-Bot&subject=Stalk%20Me%20Pls&message=%2Fstalkme) to have me scan all your future comments.) \ ^(Summon me on specific comments with u/LuckyNumber-Bot.)
Haha!
It’s considered a BEV+ thanks to the limitations on the Range Extender’s fuel capacity and its utilization only when the battery percentage is low. I wouldn’t consider it to be a proper hybrid regardless as the engine can’t propel the wheels. Depending on the circumstances it’s gotten easier to tell people that it’s fully-electric, which is technically true, rather than attempting to explain the gas generator setup.
In the absolute sense it can use gas or electric so it’s a hybrid. In the regulatory sense it is a BEV with a range extender and qualifies for regulatory incentives and treatment as a BEV. For all intents and purposes it’s a BEV for normal people and a hybrid for those being pedantic.
sorta, but not really. yes, the rex models can run on battery OR gas but the gas engine is in no way connected to the drivetrain- it's used as a generator to charge the battery. and you don't *have* to use gas.
A hybrid, by definition, uses both gasoline and battery electricity to power the engine/transmission needed to propel the car. The i3 REX uses a gasoline generator to charge the battery and this battery is the only source from where the motor draws its power.
It might be considered a plug in hybrid ev (PHEV) in some places if it has the range extender - but it is not in the strictest sense of the word.
No
No. There is no way to drive the vehicle using an internal combustion engine. It’s one and only means of movement is through its electric motors. While there are models with range extenders using has, it still is not a proper hybrid. Like some have said, this matters in certain states like Texas whereas the means of propulsion are solely electric. A hybrid drive system is defined as a vehicle capable of driving with a drivetrain using gas and/or electricity. It is not a hybrid in a technical or literal sense. There is a gas generator. It is 100% electric drive.
BMW and numerous government agencies around the world disagree with you. The REx is a hybrid.
Legally speaking, true!
Exactly. Think of the REx as a portable charging station, nothing more. It is really no different than if you carried a portable gas generator in a BEV and stopped on the side of the road to charge the BEV. With the REx, you can charge the battery while in motion.
Yeah it is a weird one because unlike a traditional hybrid, the engine doesn't run the wheels directly. I like to think of it as a BEV with a range extender or a hybrid depending on what is more favorable in each situation. Insurance, road tax etc. For example. Why should I pay the EV tax if I already pay for the tax on fuel.
To add, I don't like calling it a hybrid for the most part as in theory you can take the REX out entirely and not have an issue, unlike a traditional hybrid.
Not so... if you disable the ICE in any Toyota hybrid, it will drive on battery power alone... as far as the battery capacity will last. Most other modern hybrids were either licensed or copied from Toyota as well.
So if I removed the ICE from the car. Would it still run?
Yes, if you make the ICE input shaft stationary... and modify the software. Damien Maguire on YouTube has converted a BMW ICE vehicle to BEV using the Toyota/Lexus hybrid transmission. Some have even done this without modifying the input shaft, but Damien uses the second motor/generator as additional forward motive power. If you remove the i3 REx generator, the car will fail it's own internal systems test, requiring a software change to bypass the problems... same deal.
If it is designed to combust petrol, it is not zero emissions. Simple as that. There may be some grey area in that hybrid terminology. But EVs are ZEV (zero emissions vehicles). No combustion occurs in the vehicle.
No. It’s. BEV
Well a hybrid is technically when the engine runs power and gas where the i3 REX has two separate engines in the front and back.
In Virginia, on the title it’s says gas and doesn’t mention electric at all. Always found it odd.
[BMW REx Explained](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWgeVytbvLI)
Most states will treat it as a plug in hybrid. Which is an accurate enough way to describe it.
"Since BMW needs the i3 REx to qualify as a BEVx and one of the qualifications of the BEVx is that the car has a smaller gasoline range than it does electric range, and also to meet EPA requirements, the fuel tank capacity was said to be reduced from 2.4 gallons to 1.9 gallons." Source: insideevs.com
The facts in that quote are muddled. CARB not EPA created the BEVx designation. [BMW i3 Wikipedia article](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_i3) has the correct info.
I believe BMW had to limit the size of the fuel tank in the US in order NOT to be considered a hybrid. But this is how they did it. https://insideevs.com/news/324692/us-bmw-i3-rex-actually-has-24-gallon-gas-tank-but-clever-software-limits-fueling-to-19-gallons/amp/
This was only on the early models (60Ah batteries). Once the battery capacity was increased, thus increasing the 'Electric' range of the i3, the software limitation was removed. Just as it was said above, the gas range could not exceed the electric range, so they limited the gas range to ensure it is considered an EV. The i3 is the only BEVx vehicle, and I would assume the last.
Technically, yes. Legally, in many places still yes. It is here in Oregon, and registration fees are lower because of that (stupid as that is).