Volkswagen ID Forum banner

41 - 60 of 93 Posts

·
Registered User
Joined
·
140 Posts
Let’s face it, we are early adopters in a new rapidly changing market that may redefine itself. I personally think anyone banking on resale is taking a big risk. In my mind EVs are going to evolve to be like computers. With a Tesla for example, I could use it without FSD but someone buying it from me can add it and have a car with much more capability in a few years thereby enhancing the value of the car in the aftermarket - kind of like how someone buys a used computer. That’s just an example ( I don’t own a Tesla ) but I think that’s the new software model cars will evolve to because from a business perspective that has much higher margins than traditional vehicle sales models and all companies will want to have that benefit. I think cars will soon have much more capability and as early adopters we can only buy for todays moment and not expect future value. While VW’s have OTA capability they have not been designed with this vision and software clearly is a challenge for them at the moment.
 

·
Registered User
Dusk Blue ID.4 FE
Joined
·
64 Posts
@sethpo hits some good points around the depreciation. Just to add here are some of the lease residuals from other EVs. Not an apples to apples comparison, but may be some food for thought.

Hyundai Kona ultimate 50%
Nissan Leaf SV: 45%; SL: 47%
Chevy Bolt: 53%
Mach-e: 59% 😮 (seems to be some conflicting info on special leasing options and mention of 41% instead)

Didn't look up Tesla since the notoriety plays a lot into the resale/residual value.

ID.4 is at 49%, not the best but comparable.

Edit: Corrected the ID.4 residual for 36/10k
 

·
Registered User
Joined
·
214 Posts
And the trade-off there is a lower screen.
Yep. I quite like how high up the ID.4 screen is, because looking at it keeps the road in my peripheral much better than in other cars with low screens like my Alltrack or even it Bolt. I didn't realize it made such a difference until I test drove the ID.4. So I'm quite ok with the trade-off of low air vents, especially since in that Audi, that left vent looks like it's facials entirely behind the steering wheel, so you couldn't get it blowing in your face no matter what angle you tried.
 

·
Registered User
Joined
·
30 Posts
I'm a day into ownership and no regrets so far. I love the size of ID.4 as a really useable family friendly SUV.

Frankly, I don't care if the battery technology gets better as I know it will but I think some people overestimate how fast battery advancement will make it into new cars. Even Tesla that adopts new features, etc. all the time and doesn't really do "model years" only has gradually improved the batteries in its cars over the last two to three years. Sure there has been marginal improvements but I doubt a ID.4 with a range of 250 miles in 2021 will be at 300 miles in 2024 or 2025. My guess is that, if VW is smart, that they will gain confidence in the battery and push range increases via software improvements. I mean the battery size of the ID.4 is 82 kWh which is 8 kWh more compared to what the Model Y which is at 74 kWh and goes for 326 miles. My guess is that VW is underestimating the range of the ID.4 but I need to do more user testing.
 

·
Registered User
Joined
·
33 Posts
I'm a day into ownership and no regrets so far. I love the size of ID.4 as a really useable family friendly SUV.

Frankly, I don't care if the battery technology gets better as I know it will but I think some people overestimate how fast battery advancement will make it into new cars. Even Tesla that adopts new features, etc. all the time and doesn't really do "model years" only has gradually improved the batteries in its cars over the last two to three years. Sure there has been marginal improvements but I doubt a ID.4 with a range of 250 miles in 2021 will be at 300 miles in 2024 or 2025. My guess is that, if VW is smart, that they will gain confidence in the battery and push range increases via software improvements. I mean the battery size of the ID.4 is 82 kWh which is 8 kWh more compared to what the Model Y which is at 74 kWh and goes for 326 miles. My guess is that VW is underestimating the range of the ID.4 but I need to do more user testing.
ID4 does have a worse drag coefficient than Tesla and therefore is less efficient but the trade off is a higher roof at the back that gives more cargo space.
 

·
Registered User
ID.4 FE GW
Joined
·
186 Posts
It's important to distinguish the difference between execution and personal like/dislikes. The vehicle is executed very well generally speaking. Most of what I'm reading from you is like/dislikes in relation to your RAV4.
It is important to distinguish between the reality of a poor product and your own psychological need to validate your purchase. Comparison to other products is a valid reference for assessing quality and performance.

You may not be irked the poor design choices (vents etc.), performance (cargo capacity, accel, braking, sound) and many bugs of the VW because you have not compared it to a higher quality reference product. These values can also be compared quantitatively.

So many people tell me that it looks great. I have zero comment on that - looks have zero impact on me, but I hate it when they compromise performance. Perhaps many people find looks more important than performance or quality (bugs).
 

·
Registered User
ID.4 FE GW
Joined
·
186 Posts
I strongly disagree that it is executed poorly - range is good, driving dynamics are excellent even though it does not have neck snapping EV acceleration, space is practical. Wireless CarPlay integration is well thought out and smooth.

I have not had any issues with charging stopping after a couple of hours at home, and the DC fast charging curve is industry leading. Just check out Bjorn’s videos - he shows >33kw at 99%!

Hmmm... I see poor cargo capacity for its physical size, uneven acceleration at low speed, poor acceleration performance, poor braking, dismal sound quality, poor internal storage (no locking glovebox, no place for coins, etc).

Only 1 trip odometer and it is buried in menu options. I also seem to be sharing it with a poltergeist who randomly freezes the audio volume, locks up the touch screen, causes the screen to crash (go black), refuses to charge to the set level, etc. I gave up trying to charge it via L2 after it stopped 3 times the other night (location set with specific ready time and preferred charging times set to match TOU rates).

I judge it poor in comparison to an 8 year old "economy" EV.
 

·
Registered User
Joined
·
213 Posts
It is important to distinguish between the reality of a poor product and your own psychological need to validate your purchase. Comparison to other products is a valid reference for assessing quality and performance.

You may not be irked the poor design choices (vents etc.), performance (cargo capacity, accel, braking, sound) and many bugs of the VW because you have not compared it to a higher quality reference product. These values can also be compared quantitatively.

So many people tell me that it looks great. I have zero comment on that - looks have zero impact on me, but I hate it when they compromise performance. Perhaps many people find looks more important than performance or quality (bugs).
Putting myself at risk of getting into a discussion that seems to be getting a bit more personal than I think is necessary...

The reality is somewhere in between. Maybe it depends on how we're defining "execution", and I read it in this context to be the capability of the intended features of the vehicle instead of the grander definition of VW as a whole creating the best possible competitor.

To evaluate that definition of execution, I think one must first understand what the engineers/designers were trying to do. If they weren't trying to maximize acceleration, it's not poor execution that it doesn't have a sub-5 second 0-60 time. They were just going for a target market which may not entirely include you. Now if the intended design/purpose is bad, that's where the blame should rest but for me that's something different than "execution".

If we're looking at how VW executed on the car they intended to build, I think they had some misses that hopefully can largely be fixed. If we're going to argue that they should have built the definitive Tesla- & ICE-killer with features that many people don't prioritize, and anything short is poor execution, I am not sure I accept that as a general statement.

I'm not going to say VW executed poorly or that the ID.4 itself is poorly executed because it doesn't have locking glovebox, coin storage, slower acceleration, etc. Every car is a compromise, and I'm absolutely OK with some of these purely subjective, potentially niche features not being included.
 

·
Registered User
Joined
·
30 Posts
Putting myself at risk of getting into a discussion that seems to be getting a bit more personal than I think is necessary...

The reality is somewhere in between. Maybe it depends on how we're defining "execution", and I read it in this context to be the capability of the intended features of the vehicle instead of the grander definition of VW as a whole creating the best possible competitor.

To evaluate that definition of execution, I think one must first understand what the engineers/designers were trying to do. If they weren't trying to maximize acceleration, it's not poor execution that it doesn't have a sub-5 second 0-60 time. They were just going for a target market which may not entirely include you. Now if the intended design/purpose is bad, that's where the blame should rest but for me that's something different than "execution".

If we're looking at how VW executed on the car they intended to build, I think they had some misses that hopefully can largely be fixed. If we're going to argue that they should have built the definitive Tesla- & ICE-killer with features that many people don't prioritize, and anything short is poor execution, I am not sure I accept that as a general statement.

I'm not going to say VW executed poorly or that the ID.4 itself is poorly executed because it doesn't have locking glovebox, coin storage, slower acceleration, etc. Every car is a compromise, and I'm absolutely OK with some of these purely subjective, potentially niche features not being included.
Good take. I agree with your viewpoint. As far as I can see, the ID.4 is a good car. I have no major issues that I will not be able to live with it or that I didn't have to deal with other cars. Honestly, I think the ID.4 is much better of a small SUV EV than the Mach E and, to me, one of the first good non-Tesla EVs since the Bolt came out.
 

·
Registered User
ID.4 FE GW
Joined
·
186 Posts
...

If we're looking at how VW executed on the car they intended to build, I think they had some misses that hopefully can largely be fixed. If we're going to argue that they should have built the definitive Tesla- & ICE-killer with features that many people don't prioritize, and anything short is poor execution, I am not sure I accept that as a general statement.

I'm not going to say VW executed poorly or that the ID.4 itself is poorly executed because it doesn't have locking glovebox, coin storage, slower acceleration, etc. Every car is a compromise, and I'm absolutely OK with some of these purely subjective, potentially niche features not being included.
Fair enough.

I agree that "had some misses that hopefully can largely be fixed." That said, we have served as VW's beta testers and future buyers may benefit. This really irks me and was why I did not want to buy a Tesla.

I have zero confidence that VW will issue any retroactive fixes in our current buggy cars.
 

·
Registered User
ID.4 FE GW
Joined
·
186 Posts
Good take. I agree with your viewpoint. As far as I can see, the ID.4 is a good car. I have no major issues that I will not be able to live with it or that I didn't have to deal with other cars. Honestly, I think the ID.4 is much better of a small SUV EV than the Mach E and, to me, one of the first good non-Tesla EVs since the Bolt came out.
I think we have different definitions of "good." It may be better than some cars, but it doesn't get over the bar of "acceptable" for me. Way too many flaws that could have been easily fixed (software and hardware).
 

·
Registered User
Joined
·
213 Posts
Fair enough.

I agree that "had some misses that hopefully can largely be fixed." That said, we have served as VW's beta testers and future buyers may benefit. This really irks me and was why I did not want to buy a Tesla.

I have zero confidence that VW will issue any retroactive fixes in our current buggy cars.
This is what's driving me more toward leasing. Whether they fix the features or not (and I'm pessimistic enough to agree with you that they won't all be resolved), certainly there is hardware that will be missing from my FE but available in later years. I can hope, though, and have the option to buy in 3 years if I'm happy at that point.

With respect to being beta testers... I think that's unfortunately just the future. Back before OTA & even dealer software updates, manufacturers had to ship a final product instead of shipping with the promise of improving it later. I'm a very old young man, and I just get annoyed by the fact that the apps on my phone are updating weekly. How much is being missed if I need a weekly update to your app? Agile just seems to me to be a process to get a minimally viable product out the door & hand it off to someone else to become their problem for completion. But my only other option seems like it will be to stick with my '06 Tacoma with no technology for the rest of my life. Probably should end the rant now. lol
 

·
Registered User
ID.4 FE GW
Joined
·
186 Posts
This is what's driving me more toward leasing. Whether they fix the features or not (and I'm pessimistic enough to agree with you that they won't all be resolved), certainly there is hardware that will be missing from my FE but available in later years. I can hope, though, and have the option to buy in 3 years if I'm happy at that point.

With respect to being beta testers... I think that's unfortunately just the future. Back before OTA & even dealer software updates, manufacturers had to ship a final product instead of shipping with the promise of improving it later. I'm a very old young man, and I just get annoyed by the fact that the apps on my phone are updating weekly. How much is being missed if I need a weekly update to your app? Agile just seems to me to be a process to get a minimally viable product out the door & hand it off to someone else to become their problem for completion. But my only other option seems like it will be to stick with my '06 Tacoma with no technology for the rest of my life. Probably should end the rant now. lol
I wouldn't mind being a beta tester as much if our feedback resulted in improvements to our current vehicles. I don't mind getting frequent app updates on my phone if they improve performance or features. I am not confident that will happen for the cars we currently own.
 

·
Registered User
ID.4 1st Edition White / Lunar Grey
Joined
·
211 Posts
Re: being software beta testers, this is in fact our reality as autos advance.

My 2013 Audi allroad had a habit of rebooting frequently. My 2013 Ford Flex with a Microsoft Sync / Sony audio system had a really rocky first year but was repaired with a series of software updates.

I'm not saying this should be acceptable, but I am impressed VW is trying to do all software development in-house and, because we're early in this development (not just as early ID.4 adopters, but early in VW's software platform which will be foundational for follow-on vehicles), this is what we're stuck with.

If the tradeoff is simple code and minimal features in order to buy a bug -free car (like my wife's 2016 Volvo S60, which was their last old-school model), I'll choose the former, with the assumption the minor bugs won't severely impact usability and will be ironed out in short order.

Maybe VW could implement a neutered "safe mode" to give a bug-free, reduced feature set experience to those who desire it.
 

·
Registered User
Joined
·
154 Posts
It is important to distinguish between the reality of a poor product and your own psychological need to validate your purchase. Comparison to other products is a valid reference for assessing quality and performance.

You may not be irked the poor design choices (vents etc.), performance (cargo capacity, accel, braking, sound) and many bugs of the VW because you have not compared it to a higher quality reference product. These values can also be compared quantitatively.

So many people tell me that it looks great. I have zero comment on that - looks have zero impact on me, but I hate it when they compromise performance. Perhaps many people find looks more important than performance or quality (bugs).
I was not going to reply further because I just don't want to go down that rabbit hole as I clearly do not understand your viewpoint but in that same token, because of your viewpoint how did you end up purchasing an ID.4 when so many things about it rate poorly to you? These things can be identified pretty quickly by just looking at the vehicle and then during a short test drive. I don't like the creep and lack of auto hold and just that is keeping me from finalizing the purchase on my reservation.
 

·
Registered User
Joined
·
19 Posts
These things can be identified pretty quickly by just looking at the vehicle and then during a short test drive.
I've not driven a RAV4 EV, but just by looking at the specs (I assume TPG is referring to the second generation, done with Tesla tech) one can see they are very different cars. The acceleration in particular is very different - so is the range but that is a positive. Serious question for TPG - why didn't you get a MY?
 

·
Registered User
ID.4 FE GW
Joined
·
186 Posts
I've not driven a RAV4 EV, but just by looking at the specs (I assume TPG is referring to the second generation, done with Tesla tech) one can see they are very different cars. The acceleration in particular is very different - so is the range but that is a positive. Serious question for TPG - why didn't you get a MY?
The Model Y specs did not meet my requirements:
  • Inferior cargo capacity - both total volume and usable space (too short at hatch opening)
  • Acceleration is not a discriminator in my Kepner-Tregoe weighting matrix
  • Current Tesla quality / reliability fails to meet my requirements
  • Model Y is excessively long (6-7" more than ID.4 or RAV4EV) and has an unacceptably large turning radius
  • Model Y cost is much higher than ID.4 yet meets fewer requirements
  • Teslas have terrible image association where I live, FWIW. Every third car is a Tesla and they are driven by techies, techie wannabees, or people in a socio-economic class that I do not hold in high regard.

The ID.4 specs were much closer to my requirements, but I am quite unhappy with its execution as I have detailed in previous posts.
 

·
Registered User
ID.4 FE GW
Joined
·
186 Posts
I was not going to reply further because I just don't want to go down that rabbit hole as I clearly do not understand your viewpoint but in that same token, because of your viewpoint how did you end up purchasing an ID.4 when so many things about it rate poorly to you? These things can be identified pretty quickly by just looking at the vehicle and then during a short test drive. I don't like the creep and lack of auto hold and just that is keeping me from finalizing the purchase on my reservation.
I was only given a 15 minute test drive and was told that I needed to decide right then.
I did not like it during the test drive. My wife thought that it may be acceptable, so I bought it.
She can drive it, but she wants me to debug it and replace all the crappy items (get it to actually complete a charge, add homelink mirror, replace audio hardware, see if SW bugs can be fixed).
 
41 - 60 of 93 Posts
Top