Leaf Gen 2 - New Nissan LEAF World Premier on Sep 5, 5:30 PM PDT

phr00t said:

They really should have had the 60kWh / 200+ mile version ready for the premier.

Click to expand...

Fairly sure, if they could, they would have. AESC battery tech was simply not at a place where they could offer a reasonable 60 kWh option.

That is why Ghosn commented "LG makes the best batteries" and they sold off AESC. In hindsight, Nissan would have been better off using LG battery from beginning (TMS and all), rather than AESC.

Japan color options:

http://simulation.nissan.co.jp/LEAF/GRADE/

edatoakrun said:

So, your point is?

Click to expand...

More Nissan's point actually, that battery longevity correlates most strongly with average annual ambient temperature.

edatoakrun said:

phr00t said:

They really should have had the 60kWh / 200+ mile version ready for the premier...

Click to expand...

If Nissan had announced a "60 kWh" pack option for $9,000, what TSLA said it will charge for the extra ~20 kWh (?) on its model 3, when it begins delivery, would that have been good news in your opinion?

My guess is that Nissan's "60 kWh" pack it will probably cost another ~$6k in ~a year, and relatively few will buy it at that price.

No matter how cheap, I would probably would pass on the larger Nissan pack, if it is hobbled by liquid cooling as some have speculated it might.

Click to expand...

$6k? seriously... that won't sell but then again. maybe that is why they didn't do it.

DaveinOlyWA said:

edatoakrun said:

phr00t said:

They really should have had the 60kWh / 200+ mile version ready for the premier...

Click to expand...

If Nissan had announced a "60 kWh" pack option for $9,000, what TSLA said it will charge for the extra ~20 kWh (?) on its model 3, when it begins delivery, would that have been good news in your opinion?

My guess is that Nissan's "60 kWh" pack it will probably cost another ~$6k in ~a year, and relatively few will buy it at that price.

No matter how cheap, I would probably would pass on the larger Nissan pack, if it is hobbled by liquid cooling as some have speculated it might.

Click to expand...

$6k? seriously... that won't sell but then again. maybe that is why they didn't do it.

Click to expand...

30 kWh LEAFs are selling for under $20k with the Nissan $10k rebate
While the face-lifted 40 kWh LEAF is offered for $30k

Doesn't that work out to $1000 a kWh ? Tesla better up their game :lol:

SageBrush said:

30 kWh LEAFs are selling for under $20k with the Nissan $10k rebate
While the face-lifted 40 kWh LEAF is offered for $30k

Doesn't that work out to $1000 a kWh ? Tesla better up their game :lol:

Click to expand...

No, it doesn't. That $10k doesn't just buy you an extra 10kWh in the same old car. It buys you a brand new design, with significant technology upgrades.

The EV community's singular focus on battery size / range really gets old. Nissan is aiming to keep the Leaf the #1 selling EV worldwide. And their world includes more than the US. Much more.

Nissan rep's comment on "60 kWh" pack range, for those of you interested:

Bertel Schmitt
@BertelSchmitt

Grinning Schillaci says that bigger battery Leaf "will have more than 225 mile range."

Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/BertelSchmitt/status/905679797337985024

Of course if the "60Kwh" really has ~50% more EPA range than the "40 kWh" pack, it suggests either a very significant increase in energy density, or that the LBC allows a higher percentage of the larger pack's total capacity to be accesed by the driver.

If either of those possibilities occur, and the EPA range is more than 225 miles, it's more likely my earlier $6,000 guess for the cost for the option may turn out to have been too low...

Off-topic reply:

SageBrush said:

edatoakrun said:

So, your point is?

Click to expand...

More Nissan's point actually, that battery longevity correlates most strongly with average annual ambient temperature.

Click to expand...

I don't recall any Nissan Rep ever saying anything that stupid.

Another case where you just made it up?

Of course, there seem to be a few forum members living in the San Diego area, who have convinced themselves their own LEAF packs lost battery capacity at almost the same rate as a LEAF from Fresno would...

http://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/san-diego/california/united-states/usca0982

http://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/fresno/california/united-states/usca2234

Which EV has had issues with battery capacity degradation (more than 20% over a 3 year period)?

Which EV has more owners that complain about battery degradation?

okay, which EV does NOT have an active Thermal Management System?

Please spin your answers as best you can. It's always entertaining.

The Wired review below sums up the 2018 LEAF, and IMO, identifies the key factors, likely to lead to its success.

NISSAN’S NEW LEAF IS AN OK ELECTRIC CAR—AND THAT’S A GREAT THING

SOME ELECTRIC CARS chase superlatives. Fast, flashy, pricey rides like the BMW i8 and Tesla’s top-spec Model S, out to prove the century-long dominance of the internal combustion engine over battery power is nothing but an historical error. Other EVs take a less combative approach. They present themselves as solid and standard, cars anybody could drive and deem an acceptable replacement for their gas-powered ride.
The second generation of the Nissan Leaf, unveiled this week, proudly stands in the latter category. Its styling is mainstream, nothing that screams "eco-warrior." Its tech features are new enough to be exciting and familiar enough to avoid putting off or confusing drivers. Its 150-mile range puts it right in the middle of the EV field—less than the best, more than the rest.

"We’re not going for the most impressive headlines or capabilities, that’s not the space we’re playing in,” says Brian Maragno, the automaker's director of sales and marketing for EVs. “Nissan is a high-volume manufacturer. We build high quality products.”...

Click to expand...

https://www.wired.com/story/nissans-new-leaf-is-an-ok-electric-carand-thats-a-great-thing/

From what I've seen on a screen, and heard from reviewers, the 2018 LEAF looks like a vehicle of consistently high quality, in design and execution, something I hope will be fully confirmed after I get a chance to drive it.

The Bolt's quality felt a level below my 2011 LEAF when I took it for a drive.

How likely is the model 3 to overcome the record of below-average build quality and reliability of other Tesla's, all of which cost several times as much as the 3?

Any of the compliance/conversion BEVs...seriously?

The only player having a real shot to compete with Nissan in the worldwide mass market is Hyundai/Kia, and only if it is able to increase vehicle production fast enough, and price the ioniq (and all its other new BEVS) aggressively enough.

40kWh vs 60kWh... hmmm

If you really did need more than 40kWh, say, once a week... how much would you pay to not spend 30min/wk at a DCQC?

And if you occasionally need to drive over 300 miles, perhaps a pure EV isn't the best fit.

The big failure of the 2018 Leaf, for me and I suspect for others, is that it doesn't simply give you a list of improvements for a lower price. Instead, it gives you tradeoffs, and makes you choose it despite some of its features, instead of because of them. They range from the apparent lack of even a QC-only TMS, to a compromise pack size that doesn't thrill anyone, to the inexcusable lack of any sort of charge limiter, to smaller things like a speedometer that's going to be considerably more difficult to read, especially in daylight, than the Gen 1 speedo. This is exactly why I haven't been shopping for a bargain 2017 Leaf: I don't want another car with terrible high beams, no charge limiter, and what appears to be rapid capacity loss. So why should I rush out and pay triple or more what I'm paying per month now, for a car that would make me miss several of the features of my Gen 1?

edatoakrun said:

Nissan rep's comment on "60 kWh" pack range, for those of you interested:

Bertel Schmitt
@BertelSchmitt

Grinning Schillaci says that bigger battery Leaf "will have more than 225 mile range."

Click to expand...

https://twitter.com/BertelSchmitt/status/905679797337985024

Of course if the "60Kwh" really has ~50% more EPA range than the "40 kWh" pack, it suggests either a very significant increase in energy density, or that the LBC allows a higher percentage of the larger pack's total capacity to be accesed by the driver.

If either of those possibilities occur, and the EPA range is more than 225 miles, it's more likely my earlier $6,000 guess for the cost for the option may turn out to have been too low...

Off-topic reply:

SageBrush said:

edatoakrun said:

So, your point is?

Click to expand...

More Nissan's point actually, that battery longevity correlates most strongly with average annual ambient temperature.

Click to expand...

I don't recall any Nissan Rep ever saying anything that stupid.

Another case where you just made it up?

Of course, there seem to be a few forum members living in the San Diego area, who have convinced themselves their own LEAF packs lost battery capacity at almost the same rate as a LEAF from Fresno would...

http://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/san-diego/california/united-states/usca0982

http://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/fresno/california/united-states/usca2234

Click to expand...

It makes a great deal of difference where in San diego County you live. I'm out in East County at an elevation of 2000ft. Summer days are typically 90+ degrees and 100+ days are frequent. I didn't need to convince myself of anything, I've got 18 months of hard data to back up my claims. I have a 20 month old car with just 77% of it's original capacity. If you still doubt me, come and look for yourself. Be sure and bring your own Leafspy just to confirm my readings.

LeftieBiker said:

...the inexcusable lack of any sort of charge limiter...

Click to expand...

I'm irritated by this too.

Having a ~2k ft total/~1.5k ft net descent in the first 7 miles of most trips, the "80%" setting has been must-have.

But with the much larger capacity pack, I expect I would set up with ~15 kWh of charge, and then just set the charge timer for ~9 kWh a night in the Summer, and ~12 kWh a night in Winter, close to what I'll need to make my usual ~50-60 mile trip, a dozen times a month, and unplug the next day after the timed charge is through.

With only ~21 kWh available when new, and especially now with only ~16.7 available, I need to know my pack capacity is about the same before every one of these trips, to avoid anxiety.

With so much margin in my pack on both sides of the daily trip charge, the "80%" setting shouldn't be necessary, my starting kWh will not be crucial, and can fluctuate, so long as I know I have about 20 kWh or more available each day...much more than my 2011 had at "80%" when new!

LeftieBiker said:

...smaller things like a speedometer that's going to be considerably more difficult to read, especially in daylight, than the Gen 1 speedo....

Click to expand...

A test-drive might allay your concerns. One thing about an analog gauge with physical markings is that it doesn't wash-out in direct sunlight. So in some daylight circumstances may be more noticeable than digital, not less.

Nubo said:

LeftieBiker said:

...smaller things like a speedometer that's going to be considerably more difficult to read, especially in daylight, than the Gen 1 speedo....

Click to expand...

A test-drive might allay your concerns. One thing about an analog gauge with physical markings is that it doesn't wash-out in direct sunlight. So in some daylight circumstances may be more noticeable than digital, not less.

Click to expand...

Maybe if the numbers were red, but they are white, so they'll wash out in sunlight. As for a test drive, I won't be able to take one before, I'm guessing, mid Winter. By that time I may be driving a Bolt, which I'll be able to test drive as soon as I walk into Chevy dealer that has them in stock. If not, then a test drive won't restore the 80% setting, or give me Pro Park. The latter bit is sadly funny: I didn't even know about it until this week, when Nissan trumpeted it, making me want it badly. Then we find out that the US won't get it. Nissan seems to be competing with GM all right - in the "Why the eff did they do THAT??!" department.

LeftieBiker said:

Maybe if the numbers were red, but they are white, so they'll wash out in sunlight. As for a test drive, I won't be able to take one before, I'm guessing, mid Winter. By that time I may be driving a Bolt, which I'll be able to test drive as soon as I walk into Chevy dealer that has them in stock. If not, then a test drive won't restore the 80% setting, or give me Pro Park. The latter bit is sadly funny: I didn't even know about it until this week, when Nissan trumpeted it, making me want it badly. Then we find out that the US won't get it. Nissan seems to be competing with GM all right - in the "Why the eff did they do THAT??!" department.

Click to expand...

We'll disagree about the speedo.

I do agree about the lack of charge limiter; there's no technical reason for them to omit it and I don't really buy the EPA excuse. Tesla navigates that issue just fine. I think it's more of a PR move to not cause "battery anxiety". And that's unfortunate and ultimately self-defeating for Nissan because an 80% charge is better for the batteries if you don't need the range. The ability to choose a charging endpoint should be a standard feature on any EV.

I'd like more info on WHY Nissan is not activating the parking feature in US. Seems odd. Is American parking more difficult than Japanese parking? I'd suspect not; we have huge vehicles and the spots are usually sized to accommodate them. Probably some issue with "Lawyers in Love".

That being said, neither the charge limit nor the park deletion are major issues for me. I can get what I want with the timers and I know how to park and how to parallel park. Judging from the demonstrations I've seen, I can certainly park more quickly than the car can. And that's even without a 360-degree camera display, which will make parking childs'-play anyway.

But everyone's needs and wants are different. Bolt may well be the right car for you. The next few years are going to be great because the talk about EV's is going to be less about how they're Golf Carts, or how "Al Gore wants you to freeze to death in the dark", and more about which EVs people prefer. As we approach the steep part of the adoption curve.

The Bolt almost certainly isn't the right car for me - that's why I am so pissed off. Nissan had every chance to get this car right for those who find the Bolt too small and crude, and they punted.

I suspect that the Pro Parking omission is, as hinted by Orient Express, a cost-cutting measure to keep costs down on the 2018. They probably left off key, expensive pieces of hardware (radar unit?) to keep the overhead down. If so, and it's standard in a year or two, then anyone buying a 2018 is going to see it depreciate even worse than it would otherwise once Pro Park is available.

LeftieBiker said:

If so, and it's standard in a year or two, then anyone buying a 2018 is going to see it depreciate even worse than it would otherwise once Pro Park is available.

Click to expand...

EVs in general will continue to depreciate a lot - mainly because of the $7.5k tax credit. Unless you are content with the car (or could care little about the depreciation) Leaf 2 should be leased - just like Leaf 1.

One wrinkle is what happens after tax credit is gone. If manufacturers do not reduce MSRP, the used prices could actually go up.

Maybe, but look at how popular 2011 Leafs without the seat and wheel heaters have proven to be.

I might have missed this but does the Nissan have a "hilltop" mode for charging? At least the Bolt has that correct?