LEAF 2 : What we know so far (2018 or later?)

[LTLFTcomposite]

I will not let anyone that I know ride in the third row of any of these vehicles. If you truly need third row capacity, a large SUV or minivan with an adequate crumple zone designed behind the third row seat is the only safe way to go.

Odyssey, Sienna and maybe a couple other minivans are the only vehicles that offer a legitimate third row. I have yet to see an SUV or crossover with an acceptable third row seat. I wouldn't put a dog in that third row option on the Rogue and the Model X is another bad joke. It isn't hard to understand, when you lengthen the hood (to avoid the minivan stigma) you have to shorten the passenger compartment. Monsters like the extended length Tahoe have the needed length but their rear axle intrusion into the passenger space makes them a fail too.

 

[dgpcolorado]

That would be game changing.

LEAF 2 would need battery cooling to deal with 100+ kW Supercharging. Anyone really think that battery temperature management is coming on LEAF 2? My impression is that Nissan is going to stick tight with no temperature management in the hope that future battery chemistries would be more resistant to heat degradation. Would be interesting if they did use battery temperature management though.

The LEAF 2 wouldn't get 100kW SC.

Tesla already varies SC speed based upon battery pack size. An S75 tops out at 99kW whereas anything larger goes to 120kW. As I (vaguely) understand it, it has to do with the organization of the cells in the pack; the smaller packs can take less serial charge. This will be the big surprise to people buying the 3 with the smaller battery: it will charge slower at the SC.

So a theoretical SC-enabled LEAF 2 with a 48kWh pack would be even more constrained for charging speed. However, being connected to the extensive SC network would still bring huge value to the owners of the car.

While that would be true, the reason I mentioned Supercharging speed is that Tesla is unlikely to allow use of the Supercharger network by cars that don't charge at least as fast as Tesla cars. Otherwise the cars would spend too long at the Superchargers rather than allowing quick turnover of stalls. I believe that Elon Musk alluded to this when he first proposed that other car manufacturers could use the Supercharger network so long as they were willing to help support it and their cars could handle the fast charging.

My very slow charging S60 is probably the lower limit that would be allowed (BTW, the standard battery Model 3 has a projected Supercharge rate somewhat faster than my old style S60: 130 miles/30 minutes and the long range Model 3 charges as quickly as a large battery Model S: 170 miles/30 minutes). When I plug-in at a low SOC I briefly see about 90 kW, which rapidly drops to the 75 kW range. It then tapers from there. It takes me about twice as long to Supercharge as a bigger battery car because I charge more slowly and have to charge to a much higher SOC to make the next Supercharger Station on the longer trip legs (~140 miles). Nevertheless, I've Supercharged my car 156 times in less than a year and a half — all of it on road trips — so it works well enough. (Just got back from a 2806 mile trip to see the eclipse and visit family; such road trips are now routine for me.)

Will LEAF 2 be allowed to charge repeatedly at higher than 50 kW without TMS? The current LEAF already gets pretty hot on Chademo. I'm guessing it won't. DCFC once in awhile is one thing, doing it three to six times in a day, while driving at freeway speeds of 75 to 80 mph in between, figures to be too much for a battery without cooling IMO.

 

[desiv]

DCFC once in awhile is one thing, doing it three to six times in a day, while driving at freeway speeds of 75 to 80 mph in between, figures to be too much for a battery without cooling IMO.

I QC 3 times a day with my 2012 Leaf with mostly highway speeds (65).
In the PNW tho, so it is at least cooler.

Down 2 bars, but that's about right for the age of the battery..

desiv

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

That would be game changing.

LEAF 2 would need battery cooling to deal with 100+ kW Supercharging. Anyone really think that battery temperature management is coming on LEAF 2? My impression is that Nissan is going to stick tight with no temperature management in the hope that future battery chemistries would be more resistant to heat degradation. Would be interesting if they did use battery temperature management though.

The LEAF 2 wouldn't get 100kW SC.

Tesla already varies SC speed based upon battery pack size. An S75 tops out at 99kW whereas anything larger goes to 120kW. As I (vaguely) understand it, it has to do with the organization of the cells in the pack; the smaller packs can take less serial charge. This will be the big surprise to people buying the 3 with the smaller battery: it will charge slower at the SC.

So a theoretical SC-enabled LEAF 2 with a 48kWh pack would be even more constrained for charging speed. However, being connected to the extensive SC network would still bring huge value to the owners of the car.

It would add a few more charging options which is always a good thing but the rumor is there will be a lot more added all over my region.... someday...

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

DCFC once in awhile is one thing, doing it three to six times in a day, while driving at freeway speeds of 75 to 80 mph in between, figures to be too much for a battery without cooling IMO.

I QC 3 times a day with my 2012 Leaf with mostly highway speeds (65).
In the PNW tho, so it is at least cooler.

Down 2 bars, but that's about right for the age of the battery..

desiv

try QC'ing at 125 amps up to 85%. I see 10 TBs every day.... like right now but then again, its not all that cool today

 

[evnow]

Partnership with Tesla on SuperCharging standard?

Here is the question to all the people who hope someday, somehow Leaf will support Tesla SC.

Its very clear it would be advantageous to Leaf owners. But what is in it for Tesla ? Afterall with Model 3 the fear is the SCs would get heavily clogged.

It would make sense only if Leaf pays so much money to Tesla that Tesla can build more SCs that will lessen the expected clogging - even while adding more cars (Leafs). That can't be cheap - and Nissan would have to pass on that cost, and given the target market of Leafs - few would be willing to pay that cost.

It simply won't happen. If you want SC, you have to buy a Tesla (or some small volume, high price brand that may strike a deal with Tesla).

 

[SageBrush]

DCFC once in awhile is one thing, doing it three to six times in a day, while driving at freeway speeds of 75 to 80 mph in between, figures to be too much for a battery without cooling IMO.

I QC 3 times a day with my 2012 Leaf with mostly highway speeds (65).
In the PNW tho, so it is at least cooler.

Down 2 bars, but that's about right for the age of the battery..

desiv

try QC'ing at 125 amps up to 85%. I see 10 TBs every day.... like right now but then again, its not all that cool today

I have seen 6 bars but I prefer 5.

 

[finman100]

dgpcolorado is spot on. Ya want long distance EV very equal to gas? gotta cool the charging battery, as well as cool the discharging (driving) battery. No way around it.

Leaf 2 with larger pack (longer-ish range) without a thermal system to keep things in check is a local to regional EV. That's fine for many! But may not be the EV to replace ALL gassers in a household. right tool for the right job an all.

6 QCs in a day on a Albany, OR to Crater Lake, OR trip proves this to be true. 123 degrees F is way too hot for a Lithium pack! for longevity and health, anyway. My Leaf did fine, no issues, but I dare say I lost a capacity bar recently (35,000 miles) because I pushed it last year (2016). I'm down to 18.5 kWh in 3 years. in the PNW.

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?t=22412

My next EV WILL have a thermal management system better than an enclosed box of batteries.

Others can do what they want if it fits their criteria. I want to take my EV out of state! I want REAL fast charging (with accompanying nationwide UNIFIED charging network)! I really don't think Nissan will be providing any of that.

 

[Zythryn]

Partnership with Tesla on SuperCharging standard?

Here is the question to all the people who hope someday, somehow Leaf will support Tesla SC.

Its very clear it would be advantageous to Leaf owners. But what is in it for Tesla ? Afterall with Model 3 the fear is the SCs would get heavily clogged.

It would make sense only if Leaf pays so much money to Tesla that Tesla can build more SCs that will lessen the expected clogging - even while adding more cars (Leafs). That can't be cheap - and Nissan would have to pass on that cost, and given the target market of Leafs - few would be willing to pay that cost.

It simply won't happen. If you want SC, you have to buy a Tesla (or some small volume, high price brand that may strike a deal with Tesla).

I would expect that, to enter into a deal to access the SC network, Nissan would be required to contribute to the cost of the network in proportion to the number of Leafs being added.
Financially, I don't see it being a hardship for Nissan or their customers.
I just don't think it will ever happen from one of the big car companies.

 

[GRA]

I would expect that, to enter into a deal to access the SC network, Nissan would be required to contribute to the cost of the network in proportion to the number of Leafs being added.
Financially, I don't see it being a hardship for Nissan or their customers.
I just don't think it will ever happen from one of the big car companies.

I'm thinking Aston Martin, Jaguar/Land Rover, maybe Bentley (VW owns) or similar. If Ferrari ever goes beyond KERS, maybe them. Possibly some smaller but still major mass market brands who've lagged in electrification but want to leapfrog the competition (Subaru?), but the less expensive brands will probably wait for Electrify America to build the infrastructure.

 

[Nubo]

Partnership with Tesla on SuperCharging standard?

Here is the question to all the people who hope someday, somehow Leaf will support Tesla SC.

Its very clear it would be advantageous to Leaf owners. But what is in it for Tesla ? Afterall with Model 3 the fear is the SCs would get heavily clogged.

Exactly why Tesla might be interested in a venture to expand SC infrastructure, sooner rather than later. Having a manufacturer the size of Nissan join would be a strong move towards SuperCharge becoming the de-facto standard.

It would make sense only if Leaf pays so much money to Tesla that Tesla can build more SCs that will lessen the expected clogging - even while adding more cars (Leafs). That can't be cheap - and Nissan would have to pass on that cost, and given the target market of Leafs - few would be willing to pay that cost....

As the saying goes, "Skate to where the puck is going to be". Nissan's EV program won't end with LEAF, nor is their target market static. Enhanced distance facilities expand the target, and ChaDeMo just isn't going to win the standards war -- a significant roadblock. Cost? Yes, but it doesn't have to be amortized over just LEAF production. Again, take the long view. Tesla and Nissan cooperating in such a fashion could be synergistic. I.e., double the size of the SC network, and the attractiveness to both Tesla and Nissan owners could grow by much more than a factor of 2.

 

[webb14leafs]

I assume there is a threshold number of EVs on the road that will encourage 3rd party charging companies to build a larger network. I'm sure Tesla is willing to take on massive debt to build out their network, but companies like chargepointe and EVGo simply don't have the capital to do so. If 5% of cars on the road were EVs with 200+ mile range, then I'm sure that would change.

Also need to point out that most Leaf owners simply don't expect their 24 or 30kWh Leaf to be a long range vehicle. Tesla has had the only 200-300 mile vehicles for years now. Being able to drive 400-600 miles with a single QC stop is much more doable than the same distance on 4 or 5 QC stops.

 

[EatsShootsandLeafs]

prohibiting other cars from using the SC network seems to me a good idea, but musk has said he wants everyone EV, there may be some benefit to a partnership, so I could certainly see him opening up other brands in time to using the network.

 

[BrockWI]

I have always thought that you should be able to buy in to or pay for use at a SC location. So if you have a Leaf or Bolt or whatever you pay Tesla directly, gee sort of like the existing gas stations setup. Some, likely most, wouldn't need to use it, but if you need to it would be a great option, even it were a per use at a premium.

 

[desiv]

prohibiting other cars from using the SC network seems to me a good idea, but musk has said he wants everyone EV, there may be some benefit to a partnership, so I could certainly see him opening up other brands in time to using the network.

I don't think we'll see the SC network that Tesla runs open to other cars..
But for the sake of the discussion, a way around the issue of overcrowding might be time limits.
You could say that each car gets 1 stop at a particular SC site per day (or every 4 hours, or something) and the max time per car there could be 20 minutes. (or 30 or ??)
Then, if you have a slower charging Leaf or other car, you can still use it, but just won't get as much charge...
Might get enough to get you to the next stop tho...

Just a thought...

desiv

 

[GetOffYourGas]

I have always thought that you should be able to buy in to or pay for use at a SC location. So if you have a Leaf or Bolt or whatever you pay Tesla directly, gee sort of like the existing gas stations setup. Some, likely most, wouldn't need to use it, but if you need to it would be a great option, even it were a per use at a premium.

I agree. I think that if Musk were really open to encouraging all EVs, he would allow the consumer to make the choice whether to buy in (can be done via adaptors, adding CCS/CHAdeMO ports, etc). Instead, he is only allowing the option to the manufacturer who has a vested interest in not helping a competitor out. Gives me the impression that Musk is more interested in appearing/sounding like he wants to encourage all competitors than actually doing so.

 

[Zythryn]

prohibiting other cars from using the SC network seems to me a good idea, but musk has said he wants everyone EV, there may be some benefit to a partnership, so I could certainly see him opening up other brands in time to using the network.

He already has opened the door for other manufacturers, none has taken him up on the offer.

As for the 'pay per use' idea mentioned by others, how would you charge for it? There is no pos infrastructure set up. In addition, it becomes more difficult to plan the roll out of the infrastructure.

 

[BrockWI]

I understand there is no POS at the units, but they obviously have a way to track and limit use for the incoming 3's, so somehow you get a card with an ID on it linked a payment option and you're set. Seems pretty straightforward to me.

But I agree that Tesla doesn't seem to want to become a filling station selling to end users, just selling in mass to manufactures.

 

[SageBrush]

I understand there is no POS at the units, but they obviously have a way to track and limit use for the incoming 3's, so somehow you get a card with an ID on it linked a payment option and you're set. Seems pretty straightforward to me.

Model 3 have no use limits and there is no card. Model 'S' owners paid $2000 for optional SC access. Would you like to do the same ?

 

[BrockWI]

Then I stand corrected, it was my understanding that they were limiting the number of "free" charges for Model 3 owners and also charging folks who left their cars sitting at SC's for overly long times if the SC station was more than half full, I must have been misinformed.