TickTock said:
No matter how great a design is, there is a random element to manufacturing that will result in a certain amount of dpm (defects per million). A single sighting of an issue does not necessarily mean there is a flaw in the design - there are always lemons. This is why one or two early battery replacements does not mean Nissan knew about the issue - they probably thought these were such anomalies. Only until the recent wave of reports came in of multiple bar loss would they have really had to accept the fact that maybe there really is an issue that needs to be addressed. They have consistently said that there would be some initial loss and then that loss would slow. Apparently 1 bar in a year was expected - not so much 2. This is consistent with their interest specifically in the cars that have lost two or more bars for detailed study. I personally find all these speculative accusations and talk of fraud distasteful and serves no useful purpose. Give Nissan some time. Diagnosis of issues arising during high volume manufacturing cannot happen in one or two weeks - it's can easily take months.
I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that they are making a good-faith effort to understand the phenomenon.
However I simply can't willingly suspend rational thought and it does disappoint me that they are still making noises to the effect that these high rates of degradation are normal. You simply can't create a successful business model with a product that suffers that greatly. Of all the purported "anxieties" surrounding EVs, a major one (perhaps the primary one) is the negative experience that people have had with Lithium batteries in cellphones and laptops. They are familiar with having a battery significantly degraded after a year and needing replacement after two. When they look at $35K car with a potentially $15K battery pack, they get the heebie-jeebies. All they need to hear is that their worst fears are being confirmed in the field. Even if they live in a temperate climate they are just not going to bite. So if Nissan is indeed correct that 15% or even 30% degradation in a year is normal, then their design has a fatal flaw. Explaining that it's "normal" is not going to win any hearts and minds regardless of the veracity of the statement. Roseanne Roseannadanna is not going to say "oh that's different.... never mind...". If it's normal, they need a new normal.
Furthermore, the product was purportedly tested extensively in AZ heat. Were the tests inadequate? Or were the results simply played down at some internal level? Sometimes there is a disconnect between engineers and executives when an inconvenient truth crops up. In any case, whichever way this leans, it reflects poorly on Nissan.
Then there is the issue of the yearly battery check. Even people with high degradation get test results with "5 stars". How do we explain Nissan developing a test that provides exactly ZERO discrimination and gives
blue ribbons to even the most problematic batteries? As with the AZ tests we seem to be looking at either incompetence or a sham and neither sits well. And what of the detailed cell results that are sent to Nissan but shielded from our delicate eyes? Did it really take a group of owners kicking and screaming to alert Nissan to a problem? It should not have. Not with volumes of detailed cell reports in hand.
Lastly, I have to agree with other statements that Nissan's reference to the scope of the problem and number of owners affected is insulting, and for the reasons already given.
I really do love my LEAF and want the model and EVs in general to succeed. We as a nation desperately need them to succeed. And so my criticisms stem from enthusiasm and concern. I don't think the cause is helped by looking the other way when Nissan's statements don't pass the sniff test.
