Consumer Reports recommends used LEAFs

[cwerdna]

I think you're basically calling used LEAF buyers stupid (or, at least, incapable of educating themselves) by saying such things. Could you go out and find a crappy used LEAF if you aren't educated about what to look out for? Absolutely. How likely is that to happen? Not very. The LEAF isn't the sort of car that people spontaneously go out and buy. People go in with the intent to purchase it.
So you can argue all you want that some LEAFs are worth $6000 less than others, but let's be honest -- those are the ones that people aren't going to drive off the lots, when there are ones with 12 bars to be had.

You're obviously new here. As I mentioned, there are folks who have had Leafs for more than a year, even several who didn't KNOW about the capacity bars and didn't know they had lost some (e.g. http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=349448#p349448" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=16446" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false. Here's another example of someone who had one: http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=268304#p268304" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

Then, you have issues of salesman saying incorrect or totally misleading crap (e.g. http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=13264" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=11867" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false.

And, folks were (in YOUR area, for example) were steered towards a NEW Leaf yet it proved totally unsuitable for their winter needs, despite it having all capacity bars:
http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=261457#p261457" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=261834#p261834" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=264221#p264221" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Besides the battery degradation and temporarily reduced capacity in cold weather, there's the power hungry heater on '11 and '12s and non-heat pump heater on '13+ S trims and crap GOM that can mislead newbies. And, folks (just like in the street encounters) might not get highway speeds resulting in higher power consumption and lower efficiency than low speeds, since they're used to higher highway MPG figures than city for non-hybrid ICEVs. The list goes on and on...

So... you expect most NON-enthusiast Leaf buyers who see them for cheap, possibly steered by misleading or know nothing salespeople, also lured by perks like CA HOV stickers (http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/carpool/carpool.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false ALREADY affixed to the car to know all these things that some Leaf drivers have no clue about?

 

[TimLee]

I think you're basically calling used LEAF buyers stupid (or, at least, incapable of educating themselves) by saying such things. Could you go out and find a crappy used LEAF if you aren't educated about what to look out for? Absolutely. How likely is that to happen? Not very. The LEAF isn't the sort of car that people spontaneously go out and buy. People go in with the intent to purchase it.
So you can argue all you want that some LEAFs are worth $6000 less than others, but let's be honest -- those are the ones that people aren't going to drive off the lots, when there are ones with 12 bars to be had.

Some LEAF buyers are very smart, very well informed.
dhanson865 did an extremely good job finding a very good condition used LEAF for $8,995.
Carefully evaluated it, made a very smart decision.

But NOT all LEAF buyers are well informed.
A large part of the lack of knowledge is often the realistic range.
In discussion with salesman I learned of someone locally that bought used one, and was back at the dealer swapping it for something else and losing a lot of $ because it did not meet their range needs.
There is the two year old thread about the upset TX buyer that failed to understand.
And on capacity there are two people that bought used and trusted false capacity bars.

Consumer Reports is a national / international publication.
They should do quality jounalism that covers all the important issues.
Not half baked internet journalism fluff pieces.

 

[ishiyakazuo]

I think you're basically calling used LEAF buyers stupid (or, at least, incapable of educating themselves) by saying such things. Could you go out and find a crappy used LEAF if you aren't educated about what to look out for? Absolutely. How likely is that to happen? Not very. The LEAF isn't the sort of car that people spontaneously go out and buy. People go in with the intent to purchase it.
So you can argue all you want that some LEAFs are worth $6000 less than others, but let's be honest -- those are the ones that people aren't going to drive off the lots, when there are ones with 12 bars to be had.

You're obviously new here. As I mentioned, there are folks who have had Leafs for more than a year, even several who didn't KNOW about the capacity bars and didn't know they had lost some (e.g. http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=349448#p349448" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=16446" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false. Here's another example of someone who had one: http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=268304#p268304" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

Then, you have issues of salesman saying incorrect or totally misleading crap (e.g. http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=13264" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=11867" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false.

And, folks were (in YOUR area, for example) were steered towards a NEW Leaf yet it proved totally unsuitable for their winter needs, despite it having all capacity bars:
http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=261457#p261457" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=261834#p261834" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=264221#p264221" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Besides the battery degradation and temporarily reduced capacity in cold weather, there's the power hungry heater on '11 and '12s and non-heat pump heater on '13+ S trims and crap GOM that can mislead newbies. And, folks (just like in the street encounters) might not get highway speeds resulting in higher power consumption and lower efficiency than low speeds, since they're used to higher highway MPG figures than city for non-hybrid ICEVs. The list goes on and on...

So... you expect most NON-enthusiast Leaf buyers who see them for cheap, possibly steered by misleading or know nothing salespeople, also lured by perks like CA HOV stickers (http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/carpool/carpool.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false ALREADY affixed to the car to know all these things that some Leaf drivers have no clue about?

No, my point is that if you read the article, they do say specifically:
"If you’ve been thinking of buying an electric car, but just can’t stomach the high price of entry, consider a used Leaf."
and
"True, there’s no getting around the Leaf’s range limitations."
Everyone's talking about this article like it's saying "EVERYONE GO BUY A USED LEAF!" but it seems like they're being very specific as far as who they're talking to. They also did say that the range was only 75-80 miles ON A GOOD DAY. This is factual info here, guys.
No matter what car you're talking about, someone is gonna buy a lemon. I can point to specific examples of people I know who bought really crappy used ICE cars too. Yes, it would be helpful to have more info on how to not buy a lemon, but I don't expect that on every article on every used car out there. If they were talking about the i-MiEV, I wouldn't expect them to come out with, "Hey, you know, those batteries are GS Yuasa batteries -- they might explode!" because of some cases of trouble with them, especially when the whole point of the article is "did you know that these cars are cheap?" If CR hadn't said something similar in the auto issue a few months back, I wouldn't be driving a LEAF today. We'd looked at the LEAF at the Chicago Auto Show a few years ago, and even though we really liked it, we didn't even consider the possibility of owning one until seeing that note in CR, because of the price of new ones.
The point I'm trying to make is, if you're all gonna complain about this piece, be prepared to say goodbye to any EV-related articles in any mainstream publication anywhere, because eventually the people writing the articles are gonna say, "You know what? Screw it. It isn't worth the hassle to talk about these things." Personally, being on the side of having benefited directly from having read such a piece in the same publication, I think they're doing more of a service than a disservice.

 

[PowayDon]

I bought my used Nissan Certified Leaf with 11 bars and fully understood about the battery capacity has degraded as being ‘normal’. About the time I figured I wasn’t going to get much more than 50 highway miles per 100 percent charge, my 3 day return option expired. Knowing then what I know now I would have gladly paid the $500 restocking fee. Then capacity bar 11 burns out. It is summer time and I run the air conditioner at 72 degrees when needed. Maybe I will get more miles when it cools off in October. LeafSpy is going in this week after I get my OBD2 from eBay. My round trip to work and back is 30 miles so range isn’t an issue. My wife and I really love our Leaf.

It’s funny that ICE cars get city and highway numbers for mileage but EV's get one range when clearly that range changes for driving city or highway driving….

 

[jlv]

1) Consumers Union (at least the portion of it that does Consumer Reports) is based in Massachusetts. How much of an issue is battery degradation in MA? Pretty much none. Likewise, I'm in Chicago and my LEAF came off-lease from Michigan. You are in California. Therefore, our mindsets are completely different on the matter.

They are located in Yonkers, NY, not Massachusetts. That said, I suspect MA and NY to have similar degradation behavior.

 

[desiv]

1) Consumers Union (at least the portion of it that does Consumer Reports) is based in Massachusetts. .

They are located in Yonkers, NY, not Massachusetts. That said, I suspect MA and NY to have similar degradation behavior.

Or could it be Connecticut?
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2012/12/how-consumer-reports-tests-cars/index.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(No idea, just googling..)

desiv

 

[ishiyakazuo]

1) Consumers Union (at least the portion of it that does Consumer Reports) is based in Massachusetts. .

They are located in Yonkers, NY, not Massachusetts. That said, I suspect MA and NY to have similar degradation behavior.

Or could it be Connecticut?
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2012/12/how-consumer-reports-tests-cars/index.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(No idea, just googling..)

desiv

I will admit that it is likely that I am misremembering their location Somewhere in the northeast, anyway. My apologies for any misinformation I have disseminated, but my point stands -- they're probably not seeing degradation on their test car (to the extent that others in the southern US would be).

 

[Valdemar]

I bought my used Nissan Certified Leaf with 11 bars and fully understood about the battery capacity has degraded as being ‘normal’. About the time I figured I wasn’t going to get much more than 50 highway miles per 100 percent charge, my 3 day return option expired. Knowing then what I know now I would have gladly paid the $500 restocking fee. Then capacity bar 11 burns out. It is summer time and I run the air conditioner at 72 degrees when needed. Maybe I will get more miles when it cools off in October. LeafSpy is going in this week after I get my OBD2 from eBay. My round trip to work and back is 30 miles so range isn’t an issue. My wife and I really love our Leaf.

It’s funny that ICE cars get city and highway numbers for mileage but EV's get one range when clearly that range changes for driving city or highway driving….

You have enough time to work on 2 more bars to have them disappear, then you get a new pack. I wish I had such a plan.

 

[GRA]

They are located in Yonkers, NY, not Massachusetts. That said, I suspect MA and NY to have similar degradation behavior.

Or could it be Connecticut?
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2012/12/how-consumer-reports-tests-cars/index.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

(No idea, just googling..)

desiv

I will admit that it is likely that I am misremembering their location Somewhere in the northeast, anyway. My apologies for any misinformation I have disseminated, but my point stands -- they're probably not seeing degradation on their test car (to the extent that others in the southern US would be).

Consumer Reports relies on owner surveys to track reliability (Frequency of Repair records). Where they are located and what they themselves have experienced is not very important for that; what is important is that the largest number of LEAFs is in California, which has a commensurate influence on CR's FoR reports.

IIRR the accelerated battery degradation issue was specifically called to CR's attention in the past by some members here when the problems first started to surface. In addition, members of this forum led by Tony Williams organized a battery test of multiple cars so that Nissan could no longer deny the truth, as well as arranging for news coverage by various local consumer media watchdogs. There is no excuse for CR to leave out this essential info on the most critical and expensive part of the car, and without it they should have never recommended the car. It's as if CR were to have recommended used Yugos back in the day because the prices were really good, without ever mentioning why that's the case.

 

[desiv]

There is no excuse for CR to leave out this essential info on the most critical and expensive part of the car, and without it they should have never recommended the car. It's as if CR were to have recommended used Yugos back in the day because the prices were really good, without ever mentioning why that's the case.

Don't beat around the bush here, how do you really feel about this issue?

desiv

 

[GRA]

There is no excuse for CR to leave out this essential info on the most critical and expensive part of the car, and without it they should have never recommended the car. It's as if CR were to have recommended used Yugos back in the day because the prices were really good, without ever mentioning why that's the case.

Don't beat around the bush here, how do you really feel about this issue?

desiv

And that's enough on this topic from me, as the arguments on both sides have entered the endlessly repeating cycle.

 

[ishiyakazuo]

Consumer Reports relies on owner surveys to track reliability (Frequency of Repair records). Where they are located and what they themselves have experienced is not very important for that; what is important is that the largest number of LEAFs is in California, which has a commensurate influence on CR's FoR reports.

IIRR the accelerated battery degradation issue was specifically called to CR's attention in the past by some members here when the problems first started to surface. In addition, members of this forum led by Tony Williams organized a battery test of multiple cars so that Nissan could no longer deny the truth, as well as arranging for news coverage by various local consumer media watchdogs. There is no excuse for CR to leave out this essential info on the most critical and expensive part of the car, and without it they should have never recommended the car. It's as if CR were to have recommended used Yugos back in the day because the prices were really good, without ever mentioning why that's the case.

Ah, but see, now you're basically making the claim that the battery degradation is the reason this situation exists, which is, from what I see in the market, not true. If it was, then we wouldn't be seeing so many of them with 11 or 12 capacity bars available on the market. I think it's just the fact that so many people leased them, period. With just about any leased vehicle, people are going to return them. They don't all get bought out, no matter how popular the car is. It's just simple supply and demand at work here -- they've got too much supply to meet demand, and they're stuck with the cars.

 

[cwerdna]

No, my point is that if you read the article, they do say specifically:
"If you’ve been thinking of buying an electric car, but just can’t stomach the high price of entry, consider a used Leaf."
and
"True, there’s no getting around the Leaf’s range limitations."
Everyone's talking about this article like it's saying "EVERYONE GO BUY A USED LEAF!" but it seems like they're being very specific as far as who they're talking to. They also did say that the range was only 75-80 miles ON A GOOD DAY. This is factual info here, guys.
No matter what car you're talking about, someone is gonna buy a lemon. I can point to specific examples of people I know who bought really crappy used ICE cars too. Yes, it would be helpful to have more info on how to not buy a lemon, but I don't expect that on every article on every used car out there..

Ok, fine. The Leaf and all pure BEVs have range limitations from the start. The problem is EVs, suffer from battery degradation, for which many BEVs/PHEVs don't even give you any UI or indication of roughly much the battery has degraded. And, there are the other plethora of things to consider/look into and factors that won't occur to most non-EV enthusiasts.

As for "range was only 75-80 miles ON A GOOD DAY.".... ok, even on a good day, a Leaf degraded to say 8 bars to 10 capacity bars will NOT be able to make it 75-80 miles on a good day at highway speeds (e.g. 100 kph (~62 mph) or greater) as shown by TonyWilliams' range tests: http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=228326" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

Again, non-EV enthusiasts won't know the above nor realize efficiency way down as speed goes up. And, to top it off, the '11 and '12 Leaf have the crap GOM and no % SoC display, thus causing lots of unnecessary range anxiety.

As for lemon ICEVs, sure one can buy a lemon EV too. Problem is, this battery degradation isn't reflected in CR's reliability studies nor this brief piece. And, people won't know what to look for and can be just as easily misled by the seller as buyers/lessees of new ones have been. Salesman often say things just to make a sale, even if they're wrong. And, sometimes they're clueless and/or ignorant about EVs.

And, if used car dealers want to point to a GOM w/high numbers just to make a sale and incorrectly use GOMs as a tool to sell ones w/a higher GOM reading (e.g. higher GOM at full charge == higher price :roll, they'll charge their cars to 100%, constantly topping them off and leaving them at 100% for months at a time, worsening degradation. Again, non-EV enthusiasts won't know anything about this.

Bottom line: There are many factors that make shopping for a used Leaf unique that may not be obvious or known to the "average" used car buyer and they may have no idea how clueless some salespeople are.

 

[ishiyakazuo]

No, my point is that if you read the article, they do say specifically:
"If you’ve been thinking of buying an electric car, but just can’t stomach the high price of entry, consider a used Leaf."
and
"True, there’s no getting around the Leaf’s range limitations."
Everyone's talking about this article like it's saying "EVERYONE GO BUY A USED LEAF!" but it seems like they're being very specific as far as who they're talking to. They also did say that the range was only 75-80 miles ON A GOOD DAY. This is factual info here, guys.
No matter what car you're talking about, someone is gonna buy a lemon. I can point to specific examples of people I know who bought really crappy used ICE cars too. Yes, it would be helpful to have more info on how to not buy a lemon, but I don't expect that on every article on every used car out there..

Ok, fine. The Leaf and all pure BEVs have range limitations from the start. The problem is EVs, suffer from battery degradation, for which many BEVs/PHEVs don't even give you any UI or indication of roughly much the battery has degraded. And, there are the other plethora of things to consider/look into and factors that won't occur to most non-EV enthusiasts.

As for "range was only 75-80 miles ON A GOOD DAY.".... ok, even on a good day, a Leaf degraded to say 8 bars to 10 capacity bars will NOT be able to make it 75-80 miles on a good day at highway speeds (e.g. 100 kph (~62 mph) or greater) as shown by TonyWilliams' range tests: http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=228326" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

Again, non-EV enthusiasts won't know the above nor realize efficiency way down as speed goes up. And, to top it off, the '11 and '12 Leaf have the crap GOM and no % SoC display, thus causing lots of unnecessary range anxiety.

As for lemon ICEVs, sure one can buy a lemon EV too. Problem is, this battery degradation isn't reflected in CR's reliability studies nor this brief piece. And, people won't know what to look for and can be just as easily misled by the seller as buyers/lessees of new ones have been. Salesman often say things just to make a sale, even if they're wrong. And, sometimes they're clueless and/or ignorant about EVs.

And, if used car dealers want to point to a GOM w/high numbers just to make a sale and incorrectly use GOMs as a tool to sell ones w/a higher GOM reading (e.g. higher GOM at full charge == higher price :roll, they'll charge their cars to 100%, constantly topping them off and leaving them at 100% for months at a time, worsening degradation. Again, non-EV enthusiasts won't know anything about this.

Bottom line: There are many factors that make shopping for a used Leaf unique that may not be obvious or known to the "average" used car buyer and they may have no idea how clueless some salespeople are.

I agree with everything you've said. It's all true. All I'm saying is, you can't expect every piece to cover every aspect on every car. The point of this article was obviously "there's a lot of LEAFs on the market now, so they're cheap!" And there seems to be this assumption that we're in this place because of battery degradation, but I don't think that's really the case.
It would be nice if CR discussed the topic of battery degradation somewhere. There's no doubt about it -- it falls under their mission to discuss such issues. I'm just saying that if you expect every single article that talks about the LEAF to cover it, that's really asking a lot, I think. I still think that if you go out and buy a LEAF based on reading this one (or any one) article, you're not doing due diligence, and shame on you.

 

[Fred]

To me the falling prices on used Leaf's is not just battery degradation but also supply/demand and pricing of new and incentives.
There are incentives to buy a new Leaf but essentially zippo for used. No tax credit and in Washington state no sales tax exemption on used. So most buyers are leasing new Leafs and will repeat the cycle periodically. We fit that mold as we're on our second leased Leaf.
Combine the above with people's hesitancy about buying a range limited electric car and lower income people in the market for used cars not being to install a 240V home charger (apartment dwellers) and the market for used Leaf's is small. Out of curiosity I checked Burien, WA's inventory: 9 new Leafs and 7 used ones vs 17 new Altimas and 3 used ones so Nissan is developing a glut of used Leaf's problem. People are turning in their off-lease Leafs increasing the supply and but demand is not there, yet.
It's only going to get worse as the rate of Leaf's coming off lease increases. The used prices continue to drop as the incentives & dealer pricing cuts on new ones puts pressure from above.
And as desirability decreases with the higher range Leaf for 2016 and especially the redesigned 2017 - it makes me wonder where the bottom is for used Leafs. Dirt cheap used Leaf's and expectations of higher range Leafs is probably dampening demand for new leading to further incentives and price cutting and further price pressure on used and the cycle continues....

Why do I care as a Leaf lease cycler? Because I want to buy a second leaf to keep from racking up miles commuting in my F150 truck (my wife commutes to Seattle in our Leaf). My very short commute changed to a bit longer and a second Leaf would also help keep miles from racking up on our leased Leaf (we're doing 18K a year on a 15K a year lease). I only have to go 16 miles round trip so even a Leaf with a couple of missing bars would work fine for me. I figure a used Leaf would save not only the over mileage charges we'd run up with our leased Leaf (besides commuting it is our errand car) but also keep about 5K miles yearly off my truck. Combined I ballpark we'd save $2K a year having a second Leaf. The only reason I haven't yet is prices are still falling and that savings might get negated. There are a lot of used Leaf's at or under $9K in the Washington/Oregon area and that's asking price. I'd hazard a guess that in 6 months they'll be even lower as the supply & demand gets worse and the higher range new models are out. And in over 12 months when the 2017's start coming out they'll be even lower yet.

I think low prices for used Leafs is a great thing (I'd feel differently if I'd bought one) as it will reach the point where it will tip a whole new pool of drivers into getting a Leaf. And when they are ready to move up that will increase the chances of them springing for a new one. And I think Consumer Reports is correct in that people should start looking at used Leafs even if their article may have had shortcomings.

 

[LeftieBiker]

All I'm saying is, you can't expect every piece to cover every aspect on every car.

It would be nice, however, if they didn't get very wrong the things they do cover, like actual range.

 

[TimLee]

All I'm saying is, you can't expect every piece to cover every aspect on every car.

It would be nice, however, if they didn't get very wrong the things they do cover, like actual range.

+10.

Any way you analyze it, the article was a sad excuse for what Consumer Reports used to be.