I’ve been driving my “Holy Grail” 2021 BMW i3S for almost a year now, and it is without question one of the best cars I’ve ever owned. I adore the strange experimental carbon fiber, suicide door-equipped, rear scooter motor-having electric city car, and plan to keep it until the end of time. But as much as I love the wood-dashed wonder from Leipzig, one thing that’s driving me bonkers is its ride quality. It’s bad. Really, really bad.
Bad ride quality is not something I find acceptable in this day and age. While the “S” in the BMW i3S stands for “sport,” and thus one might expect a slightly stiffer ride, the car is from 2021. By 2021 so many automakers had figured out how to make a car both handle well and ride well.
As a car journalist, I’ve been fortunate enough to drive all sorts of sports cars over the years — the new Supra, the Porsche 911, the Audi e-Tron GT, the Lotus Emira, and on and on. And you know what all these cars have in common? They handle insanely well, but they also ride well.
Seriously, the era of it being acceptable for a car to ride like a stiff board because it’s been tuned specifically for canyon-carving is over. And if we’re being entirely honest, my BMW i3S is far from a sports car, anyway! This isn’t a purpose-built, low-slung, high-horsepower exotic with a huge wing and racing aspirations, it’s a city car. It’s a BMW i3. And yet, the ride quality on this machine is back-breakingly terrible.
When the “S” version of the BMW i3 came out for the 2018 model-year, it was clear BMW was trying to find a way to freshen up its then five-year old electric car. Not only did all i3s models receive an interior and exterior styling refresh, but the “S” model joined the fray, bringing with it unique looks and some trick suspension. BMW describes the 2018 i3S in its press release:
Underneath all of the design elements, the first-ever BMW i3s features a sports suspension that includes a 10-millimeter drop in height. The black wheel arch moldings’ emphasize an increase of 40 millimeters track width compared to the BMW i3 providing a stable stance and visually a broader presence. The BMW i3s comes standard with exclusive 20-inch light-alloy wheels in double-spoke design which are ½-inch wider than the previously available wheels. In addition the wheel arches in high-gloss black add 20 millimeters in width which optically enhance the vehicles size. Overall, the first ever BMW i3s is the most powerful BMW i3 to date and its sporty character is reflected via design elements highlighting width.
[…]
The first-ever BMW i3s features sports suspension with specially developed springs, dampers and anti-roll bars. Drivers can now also select SPORT mode using the Driving Dynamics Control switch. This initiates more direct accelerator response and tighter steering characteristics to accentuate the car’s sporting edge. Just 6.8 seconds (preliminary) is enough to see the BMW i3s burst past 100 km/h on its way to a top speed of 160 km/h (preliminary).
The truth is, that “trick suspension” doesn’t feel trick at all. It just feels stiff. And it’s not just me saying that.
In the review above, The Straight Pipes YouTube channel says about the i3S: “It’s kind of uncomfortable over bumps. it’s really stiff.”
YouTuber Jay Emm says in his review above: “I can’t help but wonder that these 20-inch alloys might be partly responsible for the relatively unsettled ride.”
When the Auto EV YouTube channel reviewed a BMW i3S, here’s what they came up with for pros and cons:
“If there is a tradeoff, however, it is in the ride comfort,” the host says. “We’ve driven a standard i3…and it wasn’t quite as jiggly as this. I think the larger 20 inch wheels…just give it that…they don’t absorb like they should.”
Evo magazine, in its review, wrote:
The electric B-Class or Golf annihilate the BMW in that regard and while the i3 feels stable and comfortable at motorway speeds, around town the large wheels seem to pick up every little imperfection in the surface underneath. It’s the primary ride more than the secondary, as the i3 absorbs bigger bumps such as speed humps, quite well.
To be sure, the base i3 wasn’t perfect either. The super skinny tires, the relatively narrow track, the tall profile, and the high seating position did make the car feel a bit unstable at highway speeds, with the wind pushing around the tall car, the skinny tires “tramlining” cracks in the pavement, and any amount of roll being felt obviously by the driver. BMW Blog‘s Tom Moloughney actually disliked the base i3’s ride so much, he preferred the i3S’s setup:
At highway speeds, the base i3 can be a little skittish at times, especially on windy days. The tall, boxy shape and skinny tires were really designed for lower-speed city driving. However, the lower and wider suspension, plus more rubber on the pavement have eliminated all of the deficiencies the base i3 has at high speeds. The car feels rock solid and planted now, all the way up to the electronically-limited 100 mph top speed.
And I agree with the “planted” bit. My standard i3 required me to really grip that steering wheel and pay attention, as the car had a tendency to wander. My i3S, thanks largely to its wider tires and track, does not. But I’d give up the mild increase in highway stability for better ride quality in a second.
The i3, whether S or not, isn’t an exotic. It’s never going to be someone’s weekend-only sports car for carving canyons, so the unrelenting suspension is an egregious error on BMW’s part.
In many ways, the S model seems to have lost track of what the BMW i3 is all about. The wider track increases the turning radius by over a foot. The lowered suspension makes navigating steep driveways and parking curbs a bit trickier. The body kit reduces range due to aerodynamic compromises. The wider tires also increase drag.
The BMW i3 is meant to be an efficient, nimble daily-driver. The BMW i3S reduces the efficiency, reduces the nimbleness, and destroys the ride quality around town. On the freeway? It’s fine. And if you thought the standard car was a bit too nervous due to the skinny tires, you might say the highway ride is improved. But this is a city car, and around town, I find the i3S to be a back-breaker.
I’m told that going to tires with a slightly taller sidewall will help, and since I bought 16 tires (!) that have a sidewall about 3/8 of an inch taller than stock, I should be able to test this out soon.
Until then, I will feel every bump in the road. Every little expansion joint and crack in the pavement will yield a loud THUD, shooting my beloved 24,000-mile Galvanic Gold BMW i3S Rex Giga World’s seat right up into my arse. This is especially annoying on chill Sunday morning drives when I’m just trying to relax as the beautiful mist from the ocean is slowly burned off by the sun rising from the east. Just as soon as I start feeling the vibes, it’s THUD THUD THUD THUD THUD. Total mood-killer.
Thank goodness this car is so excellent otherwise.
I think we might need Huibert Mees.
It’s a good thing that it doesn’t rain much in LA for most of the year, because the grip of those MOMO tires is not going to compare to the Michelins in the rain. Jason from Engineering Explained just made a video about that sort of thing with the help of Continental tire.
https://youtu.be/OMghLAsR4U8?si=5-xRSf4wENFUDEeG
If the slightly taller tires don’t improve the ride quality, you could try swapping in non-S model dampers. Shock tuning can make a big difference to impact harshness.
The MOMOs are expected to yield significantly better rain performance, per reviews.
The Ecopias are just not great tires.
Those were standard on early Prii. Swapped those out for LRR Michelins, which improved the ride.
If you’ve driven any BMW with an M Sport suspension, you’ll know that it is par for the course.
Stiffness is basically BMW’s idea of ‘sportiness’
^^this
It’s been a BWM thing for a while now, since their cars have lost any pretension of driving enjoyment and have turned into ‘luxury lease specials’
Sorry the dream is disturbed by this. More and softer sidewalls should indeed help. I suspect the sidewalls on the stock tires are even stiffer than run flats and when fully inflated aren’t far off being like solid rubber.
Man, I am so sick of the “Oh, you want a sporty car? You must want super harsh suspension!” thing.
I’m not going to the track, I just like to drive kinda fast with my manual transmission sedan on normal roads…. that have potholes, and cracks, and I want a cushy ride.
If I wanted a track car, I wouldn’t be buying a car with 4 doors and a nice (ish) interior.
It’s one of my only complaints about my 6MT Integra. (That and the seats have no cushiness to them…. which is another side of the same coin..)
I plan to “downgrade” the wheels to the 17″ ones from the base model to get larger sidewalls, but that’ll only go so far.
I don’t mind the “sport tuned” suspension in my Journey R/T, though it’s unclear what changes were made to it over the base or SXT versions. Way less body roll than you’d expect from a 4200 pound crossover with 7 inches of ground clearance. Not much in the way of curvy roads around here but you can fling it into cloverleafs at a good pace and it’s also very stable at higher speeds. Doesn’t beat you up or jostle you around either, even with the 19 inch rims. But I’ve yet to ever drive a sports car of any sort so I’ve got little frame of reference for sportiness.
Kinda the reason a caymen failed me, local dealer only had painted on tires.
GT350 I got instead was ok even with the stupid stiff base suspension. Also it turns out it’s near impossible to dump a 305 wide tire in a pothole. Kinda weird to float over them because you are on intact pavement on both sides.
Low profile tires ranks high in unforced error for the industry.
I’m a firm believer that, if you’re considering the sporty version of a less sporty car, you really should consider the “slow” version of a sportier car, if you can manage the practicality concerns. This is because a chassis designed as a sports car will usually have superior suspension geometry, lighter weight and a lower center of gravity, all of which mean it doesn’t need stiff suspension to control its body.
Meanwhile, an economy/family/luxury vehicle will generally have suspension geometry with a focus on NVH and ease of drivability (lower steering effort, better ride over bumps, gross weight capacity). With sub-optimal geometry, a heavier body and (usually) the addition of an even heavier engine, the springs have their work cut out for them in dealing with the body.
Drive an FRS and a Fiesta ST back to back on a rough road, and the Toyobaru will feel like a Rolls Royce by comparison. The Fiesta is certainly more practical and arguably more hardcore, but if you didn’t need the hatch, you’d be better off with the coupe for a daily driver. Likewise, an M2 will ride harsher than a base Cayman, as will a Mustang GT350R compared to a Corvette Stingray.
I can’t stand current budget/practical/family “super”-hatches/saloons/GT’s because they’re always deeply compromised to punch up at something they don’t need to compete with, and always end up as a worse product without a real purpose.
If you only want the top trim of a given car, please try the bottom trim of the more serious model. Chances are, it’ll make a lot more sense.
I’ve been daily driving a turbo-4 Camaro for a few years now and this matches my experience. This chassis was engineered to put 650 horspower to the rear wheels, handle on par with Porsches, and do jumps on the ‘Ring. Take ~600 lbs out of it for the base 2.0T instead, and you can put Cadillac-cushy suspension on it while still pulling 1.04G on the skid pad on street tires. Mine even has the 1LE track package, but that hasn’t ever led it to feel harsh to drive.
The other fun side of a slow-version-of-a-sporty-car is you tend to get more space under the hood, and cheaper, more available parts. It’s very wrench- and budget-friendly.
600 miles on a tank of fuel isn’t bad either 😀
It’s not sportiness so much as schportiness; very few people who ever buy a “sports” model have any clue what a car is supposed to feel like on track, so they’ve been conditioned to expect it to be stiff and uncomfortable.
That’s great for the manufacturers, because it’s easy to make a car ride like that. Additionally they can upsell the big wheels, rock hard lowered suspension and the fake spoilers because they’re a visible sign that you haven’t bought the cheapest version, even if you chose the Pep Boys tat over the better engine.
I like how the Germans used to do it. Back in the 2010s in Germany when AMG was really AMG it was possible to order one in “Business Line” trim, which meant that as far as possible your fire-breathing V8 super sedan would look just like a clattery diesel taxi.
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a15373843/stealthy-business-line-exterior-package-available-for-euro-spec-2014-mercedes-benz-e63-amg/
“because they’re a visible sign that you haven’t bought the cheapest version, even if you chose the Pep Boys tat over the better engine.”
Or if you want to flex on a budget on the 99.9% of the population who won’t know any better just stick an upscale badge on your base model car.
My favorite? 4WD badges on what are clearly 2WD vehicles. Almost as good as when posers used to stick “TURBO” on everything.
Well, manufacturers themselves put ‘TURBO’ badging on cars that not only don’t have turbochargers, but don’t even have ICE powerplants anymore. Like Porsche does: using ‘TURBO’ to denote a performance trim level on some of their EV models.
I suppose we could get into a discussion about how in our post-truth world, words (and facts themselves) have lost some of their credibility, but that’s probably best done at some other website.
Most times when I see a car/crossover these days with all wheel drive (where only two wheels are driven the majority of the time, with the other two being driven only when the first two are losing grip) the cars themselves are usually badged as ‘AWD’ or somesuch to differentiate them from true four wheel drive vehicles (where all four wheels are driven all the time). Since most folks don’t actually take their cars rock crawling on a daily basis, I think the only-as-needed AWD approach (as used on pretty much every single Mazda crossover during the past decade, as well as a zillion other cars) actually makes sense.
4wd vehicles don’t have to have all wheels driven at all times.
Most of them have a transfer case controlled by the driver.
I’ve was about to edit my reply above to clarify my meaning full-time four wheel drive cars, such as Subarus, but the edit window has closed.
I was drawing a distinction between mostly on-road drivetrains where it’s (usually) a FWD vehicle and the back wheels start getting driven only when needed (either via a driveshaft/transfer case as on all Mazda, or via an electric rear motor as on the Rav4s) vs more off-road-oriented ones.
I’m not sure if the terminology is still accurate, but my understanding was that 4WD is usually meant to describe more off-roady systems that do not have a differential between the front driven wheels – essentially locking the front wheels together and forcing them to turn at the same rate. This is good for climbing terrain off-road but does cause one of the front tires to scrub when turning on-road.
AWD could be full or part time but does have a differential between the front (and rear) wheels, allowing them to turn at different speeds. This is better for on-road driving, but without locking differentials or computer braking individual wheels will not work as well off-road. Even with braking-based traction control systems, a broken or missing axle can leave you stranded.
Definitions and terminology could certainly have changed or turned into pure marketing bs by now. Back when I learned that, coupes still had less than four doors.
Agreed re: fuzzy language. That Benz CLS (and all the four-door ‘coupes’ that came after, to say nothing of the ‘coupe’ SUVs we have now) started it mostly.
What I’m talking about isn’t part time 4 or AWD cars sporting the badge, I’m talking about 2WD only cars that their owners stuck a badge on to make it seem cooler.
And yeah Intel kinda ruined turbo in the ’80s in the same way Porsche is ruining turbo today. That’s what you get when marketing drives the ship.
“…stick “TURBO” on everything.”
Like Porsche does from the factory with its EVs?
In Porsche’s case I assumed they had to revert to long forgotten stockpiles of ancient Intel x86 chips during the Covid chip shortage.
I miss the turbo button on the front of my beige computer.
I’ve replaced “sport” suspension components to improve ride, such as struts and springs in a 2014 Avalon Touring. It needed struts anyway and transformed the car. A sway bar delete can really quickly improve ride quality. I have not found thicker tire sidewalls to do much, although I’ve tried that and lower tire pressure many times as well.
Why is ride quality so challenging for so many manufacturers? It seems you can’t find a well-equipped middle trim level car that doesn’t come with sport suspension. I blame the car magazines for bad reviews on anything not ready for F1. Possibly, worsening road conditions too as state/city budgets crumble.
Concerning the tires, it’s not just about the sidewall, but also about the rubber itself. Some brands are much more comfortable as others, even if the tire size is exactly the same. I haven’t needed new tires in a few years, but I remember when I switched from Michelin tires to Dunlop, it felt like a different car: the Dunlop tires were so much more comfortable, it was like day and night. If you check out tire reviews, always look for the longevity, since this is a somewhat objective criteria: the tires that will do more miles are made out of harder rubber, and that makes them ride harder.
It can actually go from tire model to model even within a manufacturer.
One time I ordered a set of summer performance tires for my wife’s car (Yokohama A720(?)) and a set of Dunlop Direzza Star Specs for my Miata that arrived at the same time. Both tires had the same section width (205), but the stack of four Dunlops was several inches taller than the stack of Yokohamas.
I know that section width doesn’t necessarily represent the width of the tire’s contact patch, but the difference was surprising. For similar section widths, the Dunlops had a much wider contact patch. I’m sure the difference would have been the same for a UHP Yokohama versus the more civilized version.
When you get past all-season touring tires, it’s worth checking reviews on tire sites with a critical eye towards the reviewer. Reviewers often reveal what tires they had last and what car they were installed on, allowing you to assign weight to their experience versus yours.
While you’re blaming car mags when cars don’t roll off the assembly line ready for F1, allow me also heap some well-deserved blame on car reviewers and influencers (GAH, I HATE that term) for their constant criticism about perceived lack of acceleration as well.
Econoboxes today (the very few left, and the few recently retired) are as quick 0-60 as were bona fide sporting/enthusiast rides were in the 80s-90s. Cripes, my A1 GTI took 9.4 seconds to reach 60 and it always felt quick as heck and fun as hell (albeit in a rattly way).
Nowadays, generic family crossovers and oversized pickups/SUVs that’re never used for much more than Costco runs manage to hit 60 in 6-7 seconds and nobody bats an eye. And Doug DeMuro, who I find both educational and entertaining even if I often disagree with his takes, he’s guilty of this too: he routinely gives low scores to cars for poor (acceleration) performance and most of those are cars that are sprinting to 60 in 6-7 seconds and sometimes less!
It’s irksome, but in fairness, I’m easily irked the older I get. 😉
I bought a Lexus ES350 and looked at Avalons. Our family had a 2000 Avalon and I loved the cushy ride. The 2010’s Toyota tried to make the Avalon into a sport sedan, all the ones I looked at had 19″ wheels and a sorry ass stiff ride. Handled pretty well, but its still a compromised nose heavy FWD v6 and you defintely felt that if you pushed it. The ES350 had 17″ wheels/more sidewall and rode a hell of a lot better. Not a whole lot of difference in handling, has a bit more body roll. But who cares, I bought the car to drive on the interstate
I was today’s years old when I found out that there is a ‘sport’ version of Avalon 😀
There’s a TRD version.
That’s even better, a ‘racing’ version LOL
..that’s what I think I remember the ‘R’ in TRD stands for
How much of this is a function of the super short wheelbase though?
There’s only so much you can do to make a tiny car ride well.
The standard i3 doesn’t ride great, either, but my 145,000 mile example was much better than this 25,000 mile i3S.
There is certain kind of person who spends all their money to make their car worse in everyway just to make it go slightly faster or look objectively stupid. The manufacturers have figured that out and do it for you at a fraction of the cost now.
Well, sometimes for a fraction of the cost. Sometimes, they’re happy to charge you just as much as making those for-the-worse changes would cost you in the aftermarket.
Oh the high end VAG stuff. Extra money to not include everything. But when your imaginary radio or seat stops working it’s under warranty.
This is the correct take.
You don’t need the Sport model any more to get absurd tire sizes and poor comfort.
Sadly, this is a very true statement. I’m amazed at how often ‘base’ models cars and crossovers are sporting wheels that are 18″ and even bigger. I saw a handsome new Volvo XC90 (the hybrid one, so not an EX90 full electric) and I didn’t have my glasses on so I couldn’t read the sidewalls, but I was standing right next to it and for sure those wheels were at least 20″s, and possibly as much as an inch or two bigger! It was crazy! Sure, it’s a biggish SUV so big wheels look proportionally correct, but boy that’s going to be an expensive bill when it comes time for a new set of tires.
Silverado EV RST comes with 24″ wheels on an 8800 pound pickup truck.
That’s why our Mirage ralliart is so awesome. The ralliart package is just some stickers and fender flares. No suspension changes.
“Just as soon as I start feeling the vibes, it’s THUD THUD THUD THUD THUD. Total mood-killer.”
Oh, yes, it’s seriously surprising how much of an effect something like that will have, especially if one is enjoying the moment of a lovely chill Sunday drive or stewing about something infuriating. That was in fact one of the major reasons why I didn’t keep my ’03 VW Golf 2.Slow automatic for long because its transmission, while mostly actually fine, had a damn annoying habit of occasionally slamming into another gear. I’d be tootling along either relaxing and enjoying the moment or stewing about something and then BLAMMO. So trivial and so isolated a thing and usually just once but such a total mood killer (if enjoying the moment) or a total mood booster (if stewing about something) and it was all too often the latter rather than the former; the chill mood could be attained again whereas the foul mood would just keep spiraling. The 2.Slow’s replacement, a ’85 VW Jetta diesel manual, with a surprisingly pleasant ride plus good shifting dynamics, was an utterly welcome relief.
Hopefully it can be sorted out with the i3S. Yeah, it’ll be quite interesting to see how you resolve it even though not too many of us readers actually own a i3 or i3S… stuff like this is one of the reasons why some of us read this website.
Once again, someone at The Autopian is thinking hard about the exact same thing that I’m thinking hard about. I gotta stop being surprised by that.
BMW is (in my mind at least) sort of renowned for being able to come up with suspensions that handle well AND simultaneously provide relatively decent, supple ride quality. As far back as the 90s (and probably earlier) BMW 3-series cars were among the first to impress me with their competency in terms of balancing comfort and sportiness.
But of course, the i3 is a special case: the wheels are big, but very skinny, and the low-rolling-resistance tires used aren’t exactly full of fat sidewalls to help take the bite out of bumps. Even on a regular/early i3, which doesn’t have the bigger wheels like David’s i3s has …even the base i3 is a bit chattery over broken pavement. I’ve driven several, and though I don’t recall nailing a pothole in one (I’m always on the lookout, trying to avoid potholes/debris no matter what car I’m driving) but if I did, I’m sure it would be a jarring experience.
With that said, the ‘s for sport’ version of the i3 gets that sport mode, the wider rear track with fatter rump to accommodate it (which looks nice) and the black trim/panels to offset whatever the body color is, which also looks nice. Later year i3 cars were available in a very nice non-metallic red, which looks great as mostly solid color on the regular i3, but even better on the i3s where the red is offset with a lot of black, just as David’s is gold and black. Both the regular i3 and the i3s are interesting and appealing cars… but I’d probably opt for a non-S i3 unless I knew that most of my driving was going to be on glass-smooth surfaces (which is never the case here in Los Angles).
Like Cerberus and others, I’ve outgrown my preference for big wheels with minimal sidewalls and given the choice, I would usually prefer the standard/stock/smaller wheel size (with more sidewall meat and cheaper tire replacement cost) to the +1 or +2 etc… ‘upgraded’ wheel/tire package on higher trims. Sure: the smaller wheels look a little puny when the car was designed to be able to deal with bigger ones, but it’s cheaper and more comfortable in the long run. I think the base Mazda CX-30 looks a bit odd with the smaller wheels (16s IIRC, especially since CX-30s have those too-thick matte black plastic trim and wheel arches) but having just paid almost $1,200. for a good set of 18″ Michelins for my Volvo, I’m pretty sure I’ll go for the smaller/base option should I get that choice in the future. 🙂
That’s why I choose the smaller wheels on modern cars. For the snows on my GR86, I got taller sidewalls, gaining about 22mm ground clearance, and an even better ride than stock (which is surprisingly decent).
This is quite interesting. Later E-era BMWs (e.g., E6X, E9X, E46, etc.) are so much better with the sport package it’s useless to even consider owning one without it. Back then, BMW really nailed the perfect balance between ride comfort and handling, plus the sports seats in those cars were miles more comfortable and more adjustable than the standard seats.
It sounds like BMW went backward with the i3. I bet changing to 19” or even 18” wheels (if they’ll fit over the brake calipers) would go a long way toward improving ride quality.
Another issue: my i3s rattles like crazy, either from the intensity of the bumps or as a consequence of the interior putting up with them for 50K miles (or both). I just swapped to the momo tires and can confirm they do seem to help a little.
Yeehaw! I’m excited for at least a moderately improved ride.
This is a known issue. Downside for having such a stiff car glued together with experimental tech. I just finished going through the interior of my i3s 2019, taking apart all trims which gave me rattles and stuffing them with plastic tape. Hint: start with the glovebox top trim and go from there. I got rid of 95% of all my rattles.
Yeah mine is also stuffed full of foam tape. We can compare notes! What I thought was the glovebox was actually the front of the dash trim rubbing against the windshield and a-pillar.
Yeah I still have one little a-pillar rattle, but I had to tape up:
– the glovebox
– the plastic front glass vent
– rear left door, speaker rattle plus the immovable window not snugly fit, rattling against the “b-pillar”
– the plastic cover around the OBD2 port.
Better than from the factory now 😀
Man I feel seen. OBD2 port is next level. Bravo.
We have two ‘David T’ i3s owners here?
Smaller diameter wheels, taller sidewalls.
It reminds me of the Top Gear, where they mention lapping the VW GTI (I think) using all the different modes. Regular and sport had the same times, and comfort was slightly quicker. Unless you are driving on glass smooth pavement, having a suspension that actually provides compliance is a benefit to both performance and comfort.
If you keep increasing the sidewall size and you still feel the bumps that will prove you’re a princess.
Do smaller wheels fit? Or did they enlarge the brakes? We went down an inch from stock on our daily driver, and it makes a big difference.