It is currently Fri Oct 31, 2014 3:46 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 462 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 47  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 2:31 pm 
Offline
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 4:31 pm
Posts: 4256
Location: SF Bay Area, CA
Delivery Date: 28 Jul 2013
First off, thank you for popping in again. I'm glad to finally hear of a capacity warranty, of some sort. It's better than nothing. I do like the fact that it's retroactive.
Hawk0630 wrote:
Q. How does the frequency of fast charging affect the rate of capacity loss? Are there other factors that influence the rate of capacity loss?
A. Quick charging the vehicle more than one time a day will affect and may hasten the rate of battery capacity loss. Other factors that will affect and may hasten the rate of capacity loss include, but are not limited to: ...

That's interesting. Re: QC, that's a change in stance compared to before.

Does the 8 year/100K battery warranty against "sudden" loss still exist and will it continued to be offered on the MY '13 Leaf?

I am a bit disappointed that when it falls below 9 bars that it will only be restored to 9 bars or more instead of say 11 or 12.

I'm in agreement w/Weatherman's post at viewtopic.php?p=253620#p253620 and Volusiano's post at viewtopic.php?p=253642#p253642
surfingslovak wrote:
This thread is such a fun read. It almost reminds of last summer. Please keep it coming, while I get popcorn :-)Image

Ha! I wonder if it'll grow to 500 pages. :lol:

_________________
'13 blue Leaf SV w/QC + premium packages; '06 Prius


Last edited by cwerdna on Thu Dec 27, 2012 2:39 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 2:34 pm 
Offline
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 3:41 pm
Posts: 1490
Location: Hendersonville TN
Delivery Date: 30 Jul 2011
Leaf Number: 5734
This is good news IMHO. retroactive warranty on MY 2011 and 2012 LEAF's. Similar/same? warranty of 2013 MY going forward.

70% floor on capacity means that an EPA range of 73 miles corresponds to a 51.1 mile minimum range. If you need to commute more than 25 miles each way, don't buy a LEAF, otherwise you are assured of this minimum range. Many of us can beat the EPA range. For me this means that downtown Nashville should always be within range of my home. Well at least for another 3 years when I expect to hit 60,000 miles.

As for fears voiced here that Nissan may 'top off' a battery that dropped to 69% capacity to say only 72% while being technically possible and within the warranty terms, is improbable. Nissan don't want to cover the cost of replacing a single module every few months. I imagine they would add enough capacity to take the car past 60,000 miles or 5 years with any 'top off' performed with a reasonable margin for error. I'd expect mild generosity.

By and large I'm happy with this remedy. It does add security to BEV purchases from Nissan.

Tesla's warranty is for 5 years 60,000 miles also. The warranty appears to be 'competitive'.

I wonder if the remedy will only be available to '5 star' battery report holders. Nissan have to protect themselves against deliberate abuse.

_________________
--
JP White
http://jpwhitenissanleaf.com
Blue SL-e, Reserved 4/22/10, Ordered 3/29/11, Delivered 7/30/11
54038 Miles, 16594kWh, 31kWh/100Miles, $1561 in e-fuel, Cost/Mile 2.94c
WalltoWheels 3.25 m/kWh, Dash 4.4 m/kWh, CarWings(Aug14) 5.8 m/kWh.


Last edited by JPWhite on Thu Dec 27, 2012 2:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 2:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 11:01 am
Posts: 3353
Location: Vallejo, CA
Delivery Date: 0-12-2011
Leaf Number: 16000
DaveinOlyWA wrote:
...what I really want (and fully expect) to see is a paid exchange program for ones who choose to maintain their SOC at a higher rate for a price. ...


Or, alternatively, upgrade their 24kWH pack to a __kWH pack? ;)

And suddenly you can see where a pool of 80-90% packs would become cheaply available for Nissan to reman and stockpile against warranty claims. :)


Hey, I can dream....

_________________
I noticed you're still working with polymers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 2:40 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 11:01 am
Posts: 3353
Location: Vallejo, CA
Delivery Date: 0-12-2011
Leaf Number: 16000
downeykp wrote:
Wouldn't a TMS have been a better fix moving forward. So using this logic if I had an ICE vehicle and the engine blew under warrantee Nissan would replace engine with a used one that had 50k miles on it. WTF.


Conversely, if a cylinder head cracked they'd probably just replace the part, not the whole engine.

Replace or repair -- at the manufacturer's option. In the event of a replacement you might end up with a remanufactured engine; warranty still in effect, of course.

_________________
I noticed you're still working with polymers.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 2:51 pm 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:41 am
Posts: 10573
Location: Seattle, WA
Delivery Date: 25 Feb 2011
Leaf Number: 303
downeykp wrote:
Wouldn't a TMS have been a better fix moving forward. So using this logic if I had an ICE vehicle and the engine blew under warrantee Nissan would replace engine with a used one that had 50k miles on it. WTF.

TMS can't be retrofitted into current cars.

_________________
1st Leaf : 2/28/2011 to 5/6/2013
2nd Leaf : 5/4/2013 to ?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 2:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 4:04 pm
Posts: 244
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Delivery Date: 20 Aug 2011
Leaf Number: 5954
LEAFfan wrote:
[quote="jspearman" ]I've seen one car below nine bars, and it had 45 miles on the GOM at 100% charge; [/quote]

J, the GOM number, as you know, doesn't tell the capacity or how many actual miles you can drive. If I had driven that car the last 5 miles, I could make the GOM show in the 60s. How many miles did it go with the Phoenix Test? It was at least 60 something.[/quote][/quote]


Unfortunately, we couldn't do Tony's test. I know the GOM depends on the driver/speed/acceleration and probably the individual car. I'd like to have an objective number, but I would just rather be done with the car at this point unless the 2013 magically has a TMS.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 3:02 pm 
Offline
Gold Member

Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 11:14 am
Posts: 3542
Location: Coastal LA
Delivery Date: 30 Apr 2011
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/27/busin ... mpact.html

as to settlement disclosures, above link has plenty of details on Toyota accelerator settlement, which was also filed in federal court.
so settlements dont always mean: SILENCE.

as to counting up the MNLers who are pro and con, I am of mixed mind.
i dont like the 9-bar set point or the possibility that repairs would only reset to that level. but it could work out OK.
I so think 10 bars is the level Nissan has tacitly set with all of its manuals, etc., as described above.

_________________
may reserve/delivery 4/30/11
--
ECOtality/LADWP/ Blink 4/4/11
--
Gardena Nissan, msrp -1k
red SL with etec L3
SOLAR POWERED since 2008


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 3:12 pm 
Offline
Gold Member

Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:43 pm
Posts: 9814
Location: Olympia, WA
Delivery Date: 20 Dec 2013
Leaf Number: 423014
Quote:
As for fears voiced here that Nissan may 'top off' a battery that dropped to 69% capacity to say only 72% while being technically possible and within the warranty terms, is improbable.


+1. I am sure there will be some pro ration going on. someone with 10,000 miles is sure to get a "fuller" replacement than someone with 40,000 miles

surfingslovak wrote:
This thread is such a fun read. It almost reminds of last summer. Please keep it coming, while I get popcorn :-)Image



ya, dont you love this? way better than betting on the Super Bowl Winner!

my bet? TMS for 2013! now if you think that was a long shot? I also picked the Seahawks to win the Super Bowl in September and that was 750 to 1 shot. (of course I do that every year but that aint the point!) and that bet is looking better and better

_________________
44,598 miles on 2011 LEAF (retired) 2013 LEAF;14,388 miles. Ah; 64.24-66.39, Hx; 97.11-102.35% kwh 22.0 @70% estimate; 127,105 miles
Sep 2014 Drive Stats. Corolla;213 miles, $19.20, LEAF;2032 miles $44.78
My Blog; http://daveinolywa.blogspot.com


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 3:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:11 pm
Posts: 1792
Location: NorCal, USA
Delivery Date: 15 Feb 2011
Leaf Number: 0308
Kudos!

_________________

2014 Chevy Spark EV 2LT
2013 Tesla Model S 60kWh + SC
AV L2 EVSE + kWh meter
9.4kW Solar Array + enphase energy


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 27, 2012 4:05 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 2:15 pm
Posts: 1565
Delivery Date: 29 Apr 2011
Leaf Number: 850
glad to see some progress, I think this is a big step forward!

-I agree with others that it doesn't solve the real problem, which is heat accelerated range loss that appears to be happening in various shades of gray as you go from north to south in the US. The chemistry is apparently too prone to heat related loss and this ultimately needs to be dealt with.

-I also agree with others that I very much hope that Nissan does not use software updates to simply recalibrate the capacity bars, rendering the warranty meaningless and frustrating. If this is what Nissan has in store, it will backfire in a huge way. things need to be very above board going forward.

-I also feel that Nissan needs to re-brand the car. The early adopter is by nature a tester and prover. if you say the car goes 100 miles, people will set to prove or disprove that. Say it can be quick charged and people will try and prove how far you can drive it in a day by quick charging. If the car is more realistically marketed, then people will be happier with it in terms of their own expectations and it should be marketed based on the expected loss, not as new. If 20% loss is expected but no more than 30% loss is allowed, then give a realistic number for how far a commute is reasonable and comfortable on a daily basis with the Leaf assuming some side trips on occasion. What was it designed for in terms of maintaining customer satisfaction over it's intended lifespan? For instance, best to go with the 73 EPA rating, minus 30% for long term range loss or 51 miles, minus a 20% for comfort or 36 miles. I believe that marketing the car as ideal for a 30-40ish mile commute with no public charging required is way better than getting caught up with how many miles it can go on a single charge or how long it takes to recharge. 30-40 miles covers the vast majority of people's daily driving and that is impressive in and of itself. Now that I have stopped trying to prove the car and use it mostly for in town stuff, I am much happier with it, able to use the cabin heater and defroster freely and zip around town without hypermiling and I only QC on the occasion that I need a little boost rather than try and take it long distances ... I'm a much happier customer, and I believe this car can meet the needs of many more drivers in the US if only people could more realistically determine if it will meet their needs before buying it.

_________________
Gasless: Silver 2012 SL, traded in for Lease on 1/13
Tesla S P85, Gray, pano, carbon fiber, took delivery: 2-9-13... LOVE this car!
9.8 kW PV Solar installed 9/12, http://www.westseattlenaturalenergy.com


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 462 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 47  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Advertise on the forum | Upgrade your account


© My Nissan Leaf Forum - part of the MyElectricCarForums.com Group