Nissan LEAF Update from Andy Palmer

[surfingslovak]

Problem I see is a small vocal group who bought the car with a 90% range need who now see that its not going to work in the foreseeable future. Is that Nissan's fault?

I get what you are saying, and perhaps this did not come out right, but it would be good to stop singling out owners based on their locale or range expectations. Yes, everyone in the PNW will do very well, and the noise from the South can get tiresome, but for EVs to be successful, they need to work in every corner of the country, if not equally, then at least comparably well.

What Nissan is doing is indeed industry-leading, that's true. But that's largely because of the lack of regulatory requirements. EVs are still very new, it reminds me a bit of what the Internet looked like in the early days. Nissan made a sound business decision, and I applaud them for that. Having said that, it's not over yet. As others have noted, it might be in everyone's best interest to see chemistry changes in the future or a TMS. It's not for us to decide, that's something better left for the engineers and the decision makers at Nissan and elsewhere.

But let's be crystal clear, the proper response from enthusiasts and advocates should aim towards improving the technology, setting right expectations, and looking for ways to make existing EVs work through practical and acceptable arrangements on the business side of things. This particular capacity warranty, which is voluntarily extended by Nissan, is only one of the possible outcomes and approaches. Please don't get me wrong, but I believe that there is a difference between being negative and trying to be realistic. Although I have no horse in the race, I sincerely hope that this will work out in the end; it's in everyone's best interest.

 

[reeler]

I think Nissan should offer active cooling as an option. Cooling/heating with air flow cannot be that expensive to implement. Then, those wanting a Leaf in a hot area can have peace of mind and Nissan can get compensated for it. For now, I would buy a Tesla, RAV4, Think or other car if I were in a hot climate.

The other option that I liked is to provide an extended warranty at the level of your choice for an appropriate price. Spread the cost of battery refurbishment across all that worry about the issue. If you need 11 bars for 10 years, just pay up front for it much like a maintenance contract sold because the buyer cannot afford the expense of a large spurious repair.

Tesla allows you to prepay for a replacement battery and I bet they make out handsomely as most will not even own the car when the battery goes bad and the cost of replacement is likely to be far less than predicted. In fact, should the batteries be prone to failure, I would expect a start-up like Tesla to go out of business such that the prepaid option isn't worth much if many will need it.

 

[KJD]

I think that this new warranty is a good thing. We had nothing before this announcement and now we have something that says if things go really bad it will get fixed. Not everyone will be satisfied, but for me this good enough for now.

Lets see how this works out over then next few years. We will not really know for sure until some of these cars are actually 5 years old. Nissan has more EV's on the road now than anyone else and I applaud that.

After one year of ownership, I am optimistic and this warranty helps me feel that way.

 

[tomsax]

Problem I see is a small vocal group who bought the car with a 90% range need who now see that its not going to work in the foreseeable future. Is that Nissan's fault?

In January, 2010, Mark Perry, Nissan’s Director of Product Planning for the United States, set the expectation of having 70% to 80% capacity after 10 years and that the LEAF’s battery pack would meet that without active thermal management in the US.

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/01/nissan-leaf-2/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That's right, Nissan told us explicitly that their battery packs would meet the stated battery longevity expectations even in hot climates without active thermal management.

It's wrong to vilify LEAF owners in hot climates who found out the hard way that their cars did not live up to expectations. The EV community has to stand by those owners not just because we are part of the same family but because if Nissan doesn't make good by those owners it will certainly have a negative impact on the entire EV market. I know Nissan lost LEAF sales because of the overhyped Volt crash testing fires. I can only imagine the impact of LEAF owners being left holding the bag when their battery packs lose capacity much faster than we were told to expect.

It think it's a huge deal that Nissan has stepped up and put a floor on how much capacity loss is acceptable. No other all-electric vehicle has this level of warranty. Nissan must have great faith in the battery design to take up a big chunk of risk that we all signed up for when we bought our LEAFs.

Thank you, Nissan. I hope this is just the beginning. (Tesla Motors, are you listening?)

 

[TomT]

Read the other way around, they are not going to do anything until you are down to 8 bars, which means you have lost 4 bars. Using this criteria, few of the Phoenix or Texas cars would qualify... Better than nothing but only barely... This is well above the level of degradation we were originally told to expect. Pardon me if I am not overly impressed...

Great maneuvering Nissan !!!! Now, they can keep pumping out exactly the same car in Phoenix, get exactly the same results, and pay virtually nothing. Bravo.

I'm not sure I follow you here, Tony. It appears to me that they will need to pay to maintain the LEAFs in Phoenix above 70% capacity until they reach 5 years or 60,000 miles.

 

[TomT]

If this is one of their criteria, then they should NOT offer a 15,000 mile a year lease!

(3) Higher than estimated annual mileage accumulation (such as more than 12,500 miles per year).[/i]

 

[jspearman]

I know its hard to justify any action by a company who you felt had wronged you and I doubt that anything would change your mind and your statements pretty much verifies this so just have to ask you?

what are you looking for jspearman?

Here's exactly what I'm looking for.

I want Nissan to say to affected owners, "We are working around the clock for a solution to the high-temp degradation, through either a different battery chemistry or by retrofitting a TMS into the current battery system. When we have solved the problem, then we will retrofit your car and replace your current battery with a new one."

That's what I want. You may say, "But you've driven the car and naturally there will be degradation, therefore they should not give you a new battery." I say that's BS. This car has been such a headache, and if I were to get paid for all the time I've wasted thinking about the problem, writing letters, writing forum posts, and making calls to Nissan, then I would easily make enough for three batteries.

They've done little more than deny the problem, and everything they've done has been situated as a goodwill gesture, that nothing is really wrong. I would be fine with that if behind they scenes they were quietly handling it, but they continue to do the bare minimum. I've talked to two arbitrators from Smyrna now, and both of them say there's nothing really wrong. Unless you have been in the thick of this, I think it's hard for you to understand how frustrating it is.

 

[RWatkins]

Read the other way around, they are not going to do anything until you are down to 8 bars, which means you have lost 4 bars. Using this criteria, few of the Phoenix or Texas cars would qualify... Better than nothing but only barely... This is well above the level of degradation we were originally told to expect. Pardon me if I am not overly impressed...

+1

 

[downeykp]

I will have to take acception to this. Manufacturers do not repair vehicles under warrantee, they replace. Technitians take whole modules out and replace with another module. It takes a lot less time to replace an engine than it does to take it apart and replace a piston.
A pro-rated engine under warrantee? I do not think so.

So let me get this right Nissan is going to replace a battery with 9 bars remaining with another defective battery with 9 bars remaining. This is good? Am I missing something?

Sorry but it makes perfect sense. If an engine explodes or needs to be replaced under warrantee a car company does not find a used engine and slap that under the hood. At the very least they will put a remanufactured engine in or a new one. There is no way that I would except a car company pulling a used engine out of another vehicle and slapping it into a car.

"all or nothing" arguments dont work here. the manufacturer is only responsible for fixing what is broken. an entirely new engine is probably not in the deal just as an entirely new battery which we all know to degrade with use being ENTIRE normal is not in the deal either. a pro-rated exchange is most likely and we will have to wait on details for that.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

I think this response from Nissan should enough to convince most that they have taken this problem seriously. As far as fixing what is broken, guessing they can't.

I have to think BMS was considered and discounted due to cost. Now that the LEAF will be US based, i don't see that excuse as bring viable and i think it was their plan from day one

[="jspearman"]

I know its hard to justify any action by a company who you felt had wronged you and I doubt that anything would change your mind and your statements pretty much verifies this so just have to ask you?

what are you looking for jspearman?

Here's exactly what I'm looking for.

I want Nissan to say to affected owners, "We are working around the clock for a solution to the high-temp degradation, through either a different battery chemistry or by retrofitting a TMS into the current battery system. When we have solved the problem, then we will retrofit your car and replace your current battery with a new one."

That's what I want. You may say, "But you've driven the car and naturally there will be degradation, therefore they should not give you a new battery." I say that's BS. This car has been such a headache, and if I were to get paid for all the time I've wasted thinking about the problem, writing letters, writing forum posts, and making calls to Nissan, then I would easily make enough for three batteries.

They've done little more than deny the problem, and everything they've done has been situated as a goodwill gesture, that nothing is really wrong. I would be fine with that if behind they scenes they were quietly handling it, but they continue to do the bare minimum. I've talked to two arbitrators from Smyrna now, and both of them say there's nothing really wrong. Unless you have been in the thick of this, I think it's hard for you to understand how frustrating it is.[/quote]

 

[Volusiano]

I think this response from Nissan should enough to convince most that they have taken this problem seriously.

I think this response from Nissan is NOT enough to convince me that they have taken this problem seriously. Why? Because they've changed their tune and is now only willing to back up 70% in 5yrs, instead of backing up their advertised 80% in 5 years like they've been claiming.

If they take this problem seriously, give a warranty of 10 bar in 5 years/60K and 9 bar in 10 years/120K.

That's what I want. Mark Perry, representing Nissan, touted 70-80% in 10 years. So why not honor it AS CLAIMED unless they made a false claim?

Of course there are going to be LEAFs that will do better than this. Who cares about cars that will outperform the claim? The issue is to put in a floor to cover cars that will under perform the claim.

But if you put the floor out there up front to sell the car, then don't lower that floor away from your original claim when it comes time that you have to put the money where your mouth is.

 

[Volusiano]

Read the other way around, they are not going to do anything until you are down to 8 bars, which means you have lost 4 bars. Using this criteria, few of the Phoenix or Texas cars would qualify... Better than nothing but only barely... This is well above the level of degradation we were originally told to expect. Pardon me if I am not overly impressed...

+1

+2

 

[stanley]

Volusiano, You are right on. Integrity is fulfilling what you have promised. Nissan accountants must be cheering and Nissan public relations must be very upset. This position was not thought out well and will cost them customers including me.

 

[Deleted member 3147]

But, would that car actually get a 9 or better capacity bar battery under warranty, or would one of the several additional qualifiers (high heat, high mileage, etc) mean that no Phoenix car will ever get warranty?

From the Q&A attachment concerning battery capacity loss:

(1) Sustained high battery temperatures (caused, for example, by exposure to very high ambient temperatures or extending highway driving with multiple quick charges);

(2) Sustained high battery state of charge (caused, for example, by frequently charging to 100% state of charge and/or leaving the battery above 80% state of charge for long periods of time); and

(3) Higher than estimated annual mileage accumulation (such as more than 12,500 miles per year).

I don't read that these items have anything to do with disqualifying the warranty. I read these as simply advise on how to minimize capacity loss. I don't see that he said anything about the qualifications for receiving the warranty, other than having a MY11 or 12 Leaf. I can read into it that you would be disqualified if you didn't do the annual battery checks, since this would disqualify the existing battery warranty.

However, the bottom line is that we don't have all of the details. I *hope* that they don't get too strict on this kind of thing. I think it is too early to say.

 

[EVDrive]

-2

I have an idea. Sue your parents for bringing you into this imperfect world where people try new things... and sue the doctors at the hospital and your first grade teacher because you were not the teachers pet and your paper delivery guy for not exceeding your paper delivery expectations when city rains.

Seriously, our society is way to litigious. It should be obvious to everyone who is not Albert Einstein that Nissan and all the other EV manufacturers out there are bringing to market products that have accelerated testing and there is some risk to those who are buying this innovative technology. If you didn't understand that, I have a golden gate bridge to sell you. Nissan is trying to come up with a reasonable solution for this less than perfect situation. Give them some credit and some time to see how this all unfolds before going for the nuclear option. Lawsuits should be a last resort when there are no other reasonable options and we are not there yet so throwing out the lawsuit , which we all know is an option, does not add to the debate but it does irritate me and other reasonable people so thanks for adding nothing helpful to the discussion.

+1 It is my opinion that Nissan knew there were problems and still rushed the car to market. The only way to find this out would be through litigation.

the only way to know whether Nissan was fair or foul in the development and marketing of the LEAF is to go ahead with that lawsuit and get all the corporate emails between engineering and the decisionmakers.

 

[Volusiano]

Here's another way to look at it. If Nissan truly is going to have a drastically better/cheaper battery by 2015 as rumored, and will offer LEAF owners to upgrade to this better/cheaper battery at a new but reasonable price, then the whole warranty issue we're discussing here will be a moot point by then. 2015 is only barely more than 2 years away.

So why go cheap on early adopters and offer a lame 9 bar warranty if the problem is going to go away in a couple of years? Man up, give a 10 bar 5yr/60K + 9 bar 10 yr/120K warranty now to show good will, and chances are in a couple of years, most people won't even bother making any claim with this existing warranty because they'll be busy choosing the option to buy a newer/cheaper/better-range battery instead when it becomes available.

But if Nissan is short sighted now and decide to cheat on early adopters instead with a lame 9 bar warranty, people are going to remember it and won't buy a Nissan EV anymore when it comes time to upgrade a few more years down the road.

So why trying so hard to forgo the good will and cover your *ss now instead of man'ing up to your claim, if it may not even come down to having to honor too many warranty claims after all a few years from now, when a better battery technology will take over?

This is the classic short-sighted "save a penny now to lose a dollar later" syndrome. Heck, you may not even have to lose that penny at all a few years down the road when a better battery solution comes along.

 

[TonyWilliams]

It's wrong to vilify LEAF owners in hot climates who found out the hard way that their cars did not live up to expectations. The EV community has to stand by those owners

It does seem strange that some folks are so focused on their own situation; its not surprising that virtually every example of vitriol is from a LEAF owner with THEIR car parked in a nice cool garage that is NEVER exposed to extreme heat.

The most extreme example of, "just shut your mouth and charge more" will always ring as the high of self serving arrogance for me. Unfortunately, Nissan wasn't far behind with, "all is normal".

No other all-electric vehicle has this level of warranty. Nissan must have great faith in the battery design to take up a big chunk of risk that we all signed up for when we bought our LEAFs.

Thank you, Nissan. I hope this is just the beginning. (Tesla Motors, are you listening?)

Actually, Nissan's sister company Renault offered a 75% capacity "guarantee" from the start. I'm told Daimler will offer 80% with the Smart ED. So, Nissan isn't setting any records here.

Tesla absolutely should offer a warranty, but that's for another thread.

 

[surfingslovak]

Actually, Nissan's sister company Renault offered a 75% capacity "guarantee" from the start. I'm told Daimler will offer 80% with the Smart ED. So, Nissan isn't setting any records here.

I'm fairly certain that a battery lease scheme is involved in both cases, but I agree that it sets a precedent. What I hope to see is a more comprehensive and generous capacity warranty for those that are willing to pay for it. Or alternatively, a complete pack replacement at favorable terms. Perhaps following the model Tesla has established with the Roadster and now Model S, where an owner can prepay a new battery at the time of purchase.

Tesla absolutely should offer a warranty, but that's for another thread.

Yes. I found it unconscionable that Tesla copied Nissan's original battery non-warranty almost verbatim, and that's what the Model S now carries. The proposed arrangement for the LEAF is much more amenable.

 

[azdre]

Problem I see is a small vocal group who bought the car with a 90% range need who now see that its not going to work in the foreseeable future.

If that is what you see, you are blind. I have heard of some throughout the country who need the full range of the car, but they usually find out in their first winter or their first uphill climb that was a mistake. Not one of the dozens of affected owners I have met have had such unrealistic expectations.

 

[downeykp]

So according to your way of thinking, you are going to trust that Nissan will do the right thing. This warrantee is HS. Would Nissan ever disclose that they brought car to market with problems they had to of known about without litigation? If you believe that then you must also believe in the tooth fairy.

-2

I have an idea. Sue your parents for bringing you into this imperfect world where people try new things... and sue the doctors at the hospital and your first grade teacher because you were not the teachers pet and your paper delivery guy for not exceeding your paper delivery expectations when city rains.

Seriously, our society is way to litigious. It should be obvious to everyone who is not Albert Einstein that Nissan and all the other EV manufacturers out there are bringing to market products that have accelerated testing and there is some risk to those who are buying this innovative technology. If you didn't understand that, I have a golden gate bridge to sell you. Nissan is trying to come up with a reasonable solution for this less than perfect situation. Give them some credit and some time to see how this all unfolds before going for the nuclear option. Lawsuits should be a last resort when there are no other reasonable options and we are not there yet so throwing out the lawsuit , which we all know is an option, does not add to the debate but it does irritate me and other reasonable people so thanks for adding nothing helpful to the discussion.

+1 It is my opinion that Nissan knew there were problems and still rushed the car to market. The only way to find this out would be through litigation.

the only way to know whether Nissan was fair or foul in the development and marketing of the LEAF is to go ahead with that lawsuit and get all the corporate emails between engineering and the decisionmakers.