My Nissan Leaf Forum

More hints at unknown enhancements for the 2013 model, which builds a bit of anticipation in me and well that was about all of it right?

I totally agree that a 9 bar warranty is useless for people who needs sufficient range to cover their trips. I think the minimum acceptable warranty should be at least 10 bars, which would be consistent with Nissan's advertised average of 80% capacity remaining after 5 years in their manual.

I, for one, would not buy a Nissan Leaf, if I had known that I would lose 30% capacity up front (not at the end) within 5 years of service. The whole point is that Nissan chose not to disclose the fact at the point of sales about premature capacity loss in hot states and advertised 80% capacity remaining after 5 years in their manual. The whole point is that 2011 and 2012 owners were not provided sufficient information about battery capacity loss up front at the point of sale so they could make an informed decision.

Because of this, what would be fair is to offer a 10 bar warranty for 2011 and 2012 LEAFs because Nissan was not honest with those owners and set the expectation of 80% remaining after 5 years. The 10 bar warranty for 2011 and 2012 LEAFs would be consistent with the 80% loss expectation that was set.

Now if Nissan wants to offer a 9 bar warranty for the 2013 LEAF and later, I think that would be OK, because the information will be disclosed up front and the expectation is set clearly to allow potential buyers to make an informed decision themselves. If they still chose to buy the LEAF with a 9 bar warranty, then they know what they're getting into.

But because 2011 and 2012 owners were not provided with sufficient battery loss information to make informed decision at the point of sale, their battery warranty should be 10 bars instead of 9 bars because Nissan did not tell them what they were getting into like with 2013 buyers.

I think this is a very positive move by Nissan. We purchased vehicles with a warranty that did not cover capacity and it was known that it did not cover capacity but we purchased anyway. Whether the effects of heat on the pack were known and hoped it wouldn't happen, or weren't known, the fact that Nissan has made an effort to address the current fleet of vehicles should be applauded.

Could it be better? I think falling below 9 during the new warranty period it would be appropriate to bring it up to 10 especially because the border between 9 and 8 is a very small window. The difference between 69% and 70% is nothing. The difference between 69% and 75% is more significant albeit still minute in terms of range.

The comments about adding TMS are fine and it would be great, but that would only apply to future vehicles and would still leave the current owners without recourse. It would be completely unrealistic for anyone to expect Nissan to recall 100% of the existing fleet to pull the pack and add TMS to 2 years worth of batteries. This isn't a floor mat stuck under the accelerator(Toyota) or a bolt strategically placed in front of the gas tank (Ford Pinto).

The best thing about the enhancement is that it does exactly what it says it's purpose is....the enhancement provides a sense of security to the owner that the manufacturer backs their product. That is exactly the warm fuzzy that has been missing in all discussions to date. Some people may see this as a band-aid (TM) or sugar coating. My opinion is this change is a good thing, a needed thing, and a step in the right direction for Nissan.

Nissan announced:



I expect Nissan will not want repeat claims from those who make efforts to avoid degrading their LEAF's batteries, so most LEAF drivers can probably expect to get their LEAFs back from a capacity warranty claim with something above the "9 bar" minimum level.

I would like to see the fine print of the limitations of this warranty. Would I have voided it last week when I made 2 quick charges in one day when I drove home for Christmas, even though the battery temp never went above 6?

Can they snoop all that stuff on carwings?

Hope they stand behind the car like they imply. I LOVE the car & want to drive it 'til I give it to one of my kids and upgrade to a fancier EV in the future.

Philip

Will the Nissan-issued extended warranty that I purchased for my 2011 extend this battery warranty?

The real issue is that, under certain conditions (extreme heat), the Leaf is a defective product and Nissan was negligent in testing the battery sufficiently. They operate a testing facility not far from here, so that makes the negligence inexcusable.

I absolutely do expect Nissan to fix this problem in hot climates, not give a weak alternative in the form of a very poor battery warranty. Again, this warranty is fine for other, cooler locales and most people will never need it, but it's just insulting to those of us who have lost a great deal of capacity in a very short time. I'm really tired of these games with Nissan.

Folks don't settle lawsuits and then expose any gory details. Nissan will just say it had no merit (if they comment at all) and the results will be sealed. I expect they just made a cash offer that the plaintiff(s) and lawyers all agreed to, and like all these lawsuits, nothing changes substantially except cash.

Nissan gains, because just like buying up Arizona cars just before a judgement against them, there is no record of EVER having a faulty car. Just wild accusations and disappearing cars.

They wisely based their warranty on "9 bars", which they can (and do) make to mean anything they want. Again, bravo to Nissan.

For Nissan, I give this TWO THUMBS UP !!!!

This thread is such a fun read. It almost reminds of last summer. Please keep it coming, while I get popcorn

I just have a simple question for Nissan: You kept telling consumers to expect 20% capacity loss over 5 years yet your new warranty covers only 70% capacity. What else do we do not know and why is Nissan not standing by their own publicized numbers???