Nissan LEAF Update from Andy Palmer

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
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?
 
jspearman said:
This is great if you live in Seattle and want an extra feeling of security. This does absolutely nothing to address the underlying problem of Leafs in hot spots and the lack of a TMS. I've seen one car below nine bars, and it had 45 miles on the GOM at 100% charge; at that point my wife would barely be able to complete her 25-26 mile commute. This was a carefully crafted offer to essentially give nothing, but come out looking generous. So if I reach 8 bars you only have to boost me back to 9?

No thanks. I'll be calling Nissan today.
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.
 
ksnogas2112 said:
...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...

Nissan announced:

...For LEAF vehicles whose batteries have fallen below nine bars during this period, Nissan will repair or replace the battery under warranty with a new or remanufactured battery to restore capacity at or above a minimum of nine bars...

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?
 
ksnogas2112 said:
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 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.
 
thankyouOB said:
i wonder what the settlement is?
where can we learn about that.

also, does the warranty ensure that the restoration of 9 bars is not done by changing software or resetting the coding; rather that the software on the car will be left intact so that it is true restoration.

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 :)
capwarrantymnl
 
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???
 
I'm extremely happy to hear that they'll finally announce some battery replacement pricing. Hopefully they allow non-owners to purchase these batteries as well so we can start using them in other applications and vehicles (like conversions). :D
 
20% loss in five years was always considered the "normal" or "average" or "median" loss, depending on what word you prefer to use. Nissan isn't going to provide a warranty that you won't fall below the average. That would be too costly. They chose a number enough standard deviations below average that the probability they will have to cover the replacement cost will be low.
 
ok so its a start. its the first sign that Nissan is amenable to customer needs but, oh! did I mention that they hinted at something very nice for 2013?...anyway it is somewhat how I expected it to go. the announcement comes right about the time that a supply of extra batteries will be available and because they are built in the U.S. available for a LOT less money.

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.

What about the people (like about 80% of us!) that cannot handle a LEAF with a 30% loss? We have a willing LEAFer now who cant live a 15% loss who is open to a purchase/exchange and Nissan wont even talk to him.

hoping this announcement is the first step towards some real action regarding real options
 
Weatherman said:
20% loss in five years was always considered the "normal" or "average" or "median" loss, depending on what word you prefer to use. Nissan isn't going to provide a warranty that you won't fall below the average. That would be too costly. They chose a number enough standard deviations below average that the probability they will have to cover the replacement cost will be low.
Yes, that's the most likely explanation. I welcome this announcement, and it's a right step in the right direction. I believe that I have full appreciation of what this means, and why it took so long, but I believe that I'm not alone to note that this was long overdue. The LEAF should have launched with this type of warranty in December 2010. Although the Volt is not considered to be a full EV, it always had a similar warranty, and I believe at the same percentage level too. That said, it's better late than never, and it's good to see some action.
capwarrantymnl
 
reeler said:
Will the Nissan-issued extended warranty that I purchased for my 2011 extend this battery warranty?
No:
Nissan Security+Plus Vehicle Protection Plan said:
8 WHAT IS NOT COVERED BY MY SERVICE AGREEMENT
8.1 Nissan Electric Vehicle lithium-ion battery (your 8-year/100,000-mile Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) factory battery warranty still applies. See the Warranty Information Booklet for complete details, terms and conditions).
 
TonyWilliams said:
thankyouOB said:
i wonder what the settlement is?
where can we learn about that.

also, does the warranty ensure that the restoration of 9 bars is not done by changing software or resetting the coding; rather that the software on the car will be left intact so that it is true restoration.

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 !!!!


Tony,
as always, i enjoy your certitude.
however, i can suppose as well as you can, and did that before i asked my question.

the question still stands:
is there is any news or disclosure about the settlement.
 
thankyouOB said:
is there is any news or disclosure about the settlement.
None I could find, but perhaps others have better search tools at their disposal or some of this information will be shared from another source.
 
jspearman" said:
I've seen one car below nine bars, and it had 45 miles on the GOM at 100% charge;

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.
 
DaveinOlyWA said:
ok so its a start. its the first sign that Nissan is amenable to customer needs but, oh! did I mention that they hinted at something very nice for 2013?...anyway it is somewhat how I expected it to go. the announcement comes right about the time that a supply of extra batteries will be available and because they are built in the U.S. available for a LOT less money.

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.

What about the people (like about 80% of us!) that cannot handle a LEAF with a 30% loss?
We have a willing LEAFer now who cant live a 15% loss who is open to a purchase/exchange and Nissan wont even talk to him.

hoping this announcement is the first step towards some real action regarding real options

dave is absolutely spot on here:

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.

What about the people (like about 80% of us!) that cannot handle a LEAF with a 30% loss?


i want to keep my LEAF for 8-10 years. I want to be able to maintain a basic range for that period.
ideally, it would be a roundtrip in the 65-mile range at 55-60 miles an hour for about 80 percent of that trip.
you get the picture. I would be willing to pay to improve or upgrade my pack otherwise the car loses utility for me.
I want to know the pricing for that.

at the very least, this program seems to put a floor to resale value in terms of capacity of battery. that is good news, as stated above.
 
surfingslovak said:
This thread is such a fun read. It almost reminds of last summer. Please keep it coming, while I get popcorn :)
capwarrantymnl
Might be fun to keep a tally of yea and nay sayers, but I don't feel like going back through all the posts. :lol:
 
Back
Top