2016 Leaf: How many kWh needed, and at what price?

[DaveinOlyWA]

actually i fully believe "ever" to be correct. Nissan understands that more range is desired but at the same time, the LEAF works VERY well for the segment it was designed for. there are few (or relatively few) owners that have not found a way to make the car work. but they are early adopters who are willing to "work at" making it work but realistically, its not that much work.

Now Nissan's next move will be to bring in more of the "middle of the road" consumer who is naturally apprehensive to the limitations of the unknown (notice i did not say EVs...) and that will NOT TO BE CHANGING WHAT ALREADY WORKS but to add something that will.

Ford did not stop making SUVs because crew cab pickups out sold them 3 to 1 now did they? they realized that there is a segment that does not want the bed just as Nissan realizes there are people who want an EV with longer range that is more "vanilla" and "more sedanish" and "less standoutish"

get the picture? the LEAF is not changing significantly EVER. Nissan is and will be adding to the EV lineup and doing it probably quicker than we realize.

as far as "stretching the budget" a few things that will happen and of this i am about as certain as one can be concerning things that have yet to pass (reading too many Hobbit press releases i think )

* you will get more range for the same money you are paying today

*your current LEAF will be cheaper in the future.

"I think we wont see much more range in a LEAF ever."

But, what if battery technology (or even aerodynamics) changes to the point that longer range can be added at minimal cost? Would they really leave the LEAF at 70 miles range? I have my doubts.

The other notion I have is more of a quibble: I assume that Nissan will make the "LEAF" a family of vehicles someday much as Toyota has done with the Prius. If that happens, then there might well be LEAF models with multiple range options. But retain a plain vanilla LEAF option with 70 mile range? Perhaps you are correct about that. However, it remains to be seen whether the 70 mile LEAF will achieve widespread adoption. [Don't forget that your usage pattern, with an extensive DCFC infrastructure to rely on, is way, way outside the mainstream for most areas of the country!]

oh no!! u missed my point. the LEAF is anything but Vanilla and quite frankly there are people that would NEVER consider buying a LEAF purely on looks alone. the mainstream EV that Nissan offers in the future will not be a LEAF, it will be a sedan

 

[evnow]

So, my question at that point (and this is still about 3 years down the road for me) will be to look to see if Nissan is offering something competitive.

A better question would be - what do you think we will see in a MY16 Leaf - and whether there will be any BEVs that would be competitive.

I think MY16 Leaf will
- come with multiple battery options
- a possible range extender (like i3)
- cost about $20k before any credits

I don't think any other OEM will offer a BEV at that price to compete with Leaf. They will either have lower range, smaller size or be more expensive.

 

[jlsoaz]

Regarding the RAV4 EV corporate information supplied, I see the original filing here providing the $100m figure:

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318605/000119312511192198/d8k.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Regarding the $100m/2600vehicles = $38.46k per vehicle calculation, it's a worthwhile calculation to have in mind, but I think it still begs the question of what such a vehicle would cost to manufacture, in higher volume production. I also take it with some grain of salt in that the Toyota relationship with Tesla is somewhat complicated (NUMMI plant, Toyota ownership of Tesla stock, Tesla relationship with Panasonic which in turn has a relationship with Toyota).

From Toyota's deals, language and other multiple signals over the years, it seems more or less clear that they are somewhat committed to not going into longer-range PEV production for now; reviewing the links on this is a good way for me to reinforce my sense of that. So, the point is taken that the present-day RAV4 EV is (firmly) just a compliance car, and the questions are rendered to academic ones, but I think it's worth asking and standing up for the questions and any possible useful answers that might come up. So, my question stands as to whether suddenly excellent sales numbers would help Toyota think about possible mass production, whether of this or some other PEV.

My point also stands that in some there are significant parallels here to the 2000-2002 attitude of Toyota, while in other ways there are obviously many differences:

Possible significant similarities:
Toyota's hostility toward the idea of near-term mass-production of longer range PEVs (as evidenced by their 2600 vehicle limit, and in other ways). Echoed by Honda.

Are Toyota and other manufacturers (and associates?) leveraging low compliance vehicle sales to claim (with circular reasoning, sales inhibitions and disingenuousness) that demand is low? (If so, then this is outrageous, but I don't have time just this moment to nail it down. I would think that the movie Who Killed The Electric Car and many other efforts would have helped put this ridiculous and false-logic corporate tactic to bed.)

Differences of note:
Probably too numerous to mention, but they include Tesla experiencing glaring success in the high-kWh high-luxury part of the market, and having announced that it is moving tangibly toward making a more affordable somewhat-lower-kWh vehicle. (So, to tie this in with the thread originations - the clock is ticking on those who would compete with Tesla in that more-affordably-priced 30-40 kWh segment around 2015-2016).
PHEV availability and, to some extent, success.

Regarding CARB, I don't quite get where Toyota's Prius PHEV figures into this.

Regarding Dave's driving results and points, impressive to see these 100+ mile efforts, but again, we each have different circumstances, time budgets (it takes awhile to drive slowly enough to conserve energy to go 100+ miles), dollar budgets and EVSE availability constraints.

Bottom line here for me, for now, I'll probably be recommending the RAV4 EV to a couple of California contacts as a sweet-heart deal for them to know about. I do think the lack of a quick charge port is kind of ridiculous, but at the present price, the lack of a quick charge port is not enough to cause me to recommend the Leaf over the RAV4, in the same of some friends who I think might be able to afford the more expensive vehicle. (and keeping in mind respecting that everyone has different needs and budgets).

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

So, my question at that point (and this is still about 3 years down the road for me) will be to look to see if Nissan is offering something competitive.

A better question would be - what do you think we will see in a MY16 Leaf - and whether there will be any BEVs that would be competitive.

I think MY16 Leaf will
- come with multiple battery options
- a possible range extender (like i3)
- cost about $20k before any credits

I don't think any other OEM will offer a BEV at that price to compete with Leaf. They will either have lower range, smaller size or be more expensive.

this is more likely.

what i see in 2015 is the top of the line LEAF going for $29,995 with 100 miles real range with the entry level LEAF going for 19,995 with the 80 miles. two pack options if that. but realistically we have to wait for significant charge storage technology to see what we want to see.


but I also see a 5 passenger mid sized sedan (same size as a Fusion or something similar) in the 130-150 mile range priced pretty much where the 2013 LEAF is now. hence my statement "more range, same price" *THIS* will be their mainstream vehicle, not the LEAF.

i am also willing to predict that 2015/2016 time frame, Nissan will have nearly a half dozen EV options out there. NV 200, a sports car option, etc.

they did not spend 5 Billion to bank all their hopes on the LEAF. they did it for the basic ground work to provide an entire line of EVs

 

[dgpcolorado]

oh no!! u missed my point. the LEAF is anything but Vanilla and quite frankly there are people that would NEVER consider buying a LEAF purely on looks alone. the mainstream EV that Nissan offers in the future will not be a LEAF, it will be a sedan

Ok, got it.

In contrast to the sedan-o-philes, I never buy anything but hatchbacks, for reasons of utility, and have long been baffled by the popularity of sedans.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

oh no!! u missed my point. the LEAF is anything but Vanilla and quite frankly there are people that would NEVER consider buying a LEAF purely on looks alone. the mainstream EV that Nissan offers in the future will not be a LEAF, it will be a sedan

Ok, got it.

In contrast to the sedan-o-philes, I never buy anything but hatchbacks, for reasons of utility, and have long been baffled by the popularity of sedans.

u preaching to the choir on that one! my MINIMAL requirement for sedan is fold down rear seats so at least i can get something low and long in the trunk if i need to.

 

[GRA]

I think a battery that gives 100 EPA miles for <=$30k MSRP (<= $25k preferred) is the absolute minimum that will be acceptable for 2nd Gen. BEVs, but I consider that only provides a dependable range (battery at EOL @ 70%, bottom 20% of pack kept as emergency reserve, temperate conditions of -5 to +40C/23 to 104 deg. F, so 10% for HVAC) of 40 miles: 100 miles x [(.7 - .2) - .1]. Ideally I'd want at least double the Leaf's current EPA range at the same price to make the car marginally useful for me, and 200 EPA miles or more is what I really require, barring battery leasing that guarantees my capacity at some value above 70%.

And the car will have to have a TMS, barring a breakthrough battery chemistry; there's just too much of the U.S. that experiences high or low temps that affect the battery's capacity and/or lifetime, for the Leaf to be fully practical without one almost anywhere in the country. Skipping Montana/Wyoming/Inland Alaska and Death Valley is one thing, but having to avoid the entire desert southwest, most of the Great Lakes region and parts of the plains plus the southeast as well is not going to work.

So, figure the smallest battery couldn't be less than 30-32kWh, and larger ones would need to go to 36-40 or better yet 48-50kWh, keeping the MSRP below $35k. I suspect the higher numbers won't be possible by 2016 at that price, but we'll have to see what happens with specific energy/density and cost by then. I think multiple pack options are absolutely necessary to boost the sales volume.

 

[cwerdna]

Regarding CARB, I don't quite get where Toyota's Prius PHEV figures into this.

It's an enhanced AT-PZEV (also stated at http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/carpool/carpool.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false, so that's part of their method of ZEV compliance along w/EVs, AT-PZEVs and PZEVs.

 

[jlsoaz]

Regarding CARB, I don't quite get where Toyota's Prius PHEV figures into this.

It's an enhanced AT-PZEV (also stated at http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/carpool/carpool.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false, so that's part of their method of ZEV compliance along w/EVs, AT-PZEVs and PZEVs.

I guess I'm trying to figure out if Toyota sells a decent numbers of Prius PHEVs if it is possible for them to get enough credits for them not to have to worry about selling the RAV4 EV or other EVs.

 

[davidcary]

There is a lot of optimism on pack pricing here.

Just because the 2013 Leaf was able to drop the price some, doesn't mean that trend can continue. There was probably a steep learning curve in saving money. And a big part of the price drop was decontenting. And there was the early adopter penalty vs profit potential from Nissan.

Let's say the Leaf battery is $10k, the consensus seems to want double in a $25k car. How would that be possible? I think a reasonable expectation is 4% decline in price per year so in 4 years, you are still looking at a $18k pack.

Are people really expecting better than a 4% decline in pricing on batteries? This is not memory chips. This is a relatively mature technology - with vast room for improvement for sure.

Or is everyone just dreaming?

 

[GRA]

There is a lot of optimism on pack pricing here.

Just because the 2013 Leaf was able to drop the price some, doesn't mean that trend can continue. There was probably a steep learning curve in saving money. And a big part of the price drop was decontenting. And there was the early adopter penalty vs profit potential from Nissan.

Let's say the Leaf battery is $10k, the consensus seems to want double in a $25k car. How would that be possible? I think a reasonable expectation is 4% decline in price per year so in 4 years, you are still looking at a $18k pack.

Are people really expecting better than a 4% decline in pricing on batteries? This is not memory chips. This is a relatively mature technology - with vast room for improvement for sure.

Or is everyone just dreaming?

Personally, I'm expecting 6-8%/yr, which is the historical average rate for batteries according to McKinsey and others. Combine that with a further decontented S or SV, some additional price advantage due to larger production volumes, and the $28,800 MSRP of the current S leaving $1,100 (less inflation) for some extra battery under my $30k threshold, and I think 30-32kWh can be done. Assuming $500/kWh for the pack at that time, you should be able to get to 36-40kWh for say $35k, assuming the specific energy/density has improved enough to not require a bigger/heavier chassis than the current Leaf.

If any of the nano etc. advanced battery technologies we're constantly bombarded with press releases about come online by 2016 at a reasonable price, more should be possible.

 

[keydiver]

I think we wont see much more range ina LEAF ever. It fills the need of its target segment quite well.

* you will get more range for the same money you are paying today

Huh? :?
I think one BIG reason, if any, that Nissan might add more capacity is to buy themselves more reserve/hidden capacity. If more and more LEAFs start showing up with prematurely degraded batteries, and they aren't going to add TMS, they might consider more capacity so the batteries aren't cycled as often. With 25% more capacity, I would probably never charge to 100%.

 

[adric22]

I've been following this thread but it is really hard to form an opinion. There are so many factors that determine how many Kwh a vehicle should need. For example, availability of public chargers including DC fast chargers. For the sake of argument, we'll say there will be no change between now and 2016.

One constant factor I've seen among the buying public is that everybody seems to want more capacity. Not only the Leaf, bu the Volt too. And most people saying this seem to be willing to pay for it. The confirmation of this came today when I saw Tesla will no longer offer the low-end battery due to lack of demand. So having said that, I do not foresee anyone coming out with a new year model BEV or PHEV that has less EV range than the previous year model. It will either stay the same or it will increase with the new year models.

The Leaf's current 75 mile range is really insufficient for most people around where I live, especially during winter. When I say insufficient, I mean without them having to make a few changes to their routine or lifestyle. Most people won't be willing to do that. I believe 125-150 miles EPA range, or roughly twice what the Leaf currently offers, would be the sweet spot where most people would no longer have an excuse. I mean sure, there will always be the one hold out that says "I'll never change to an EV unless it can do 1,200 miles per charge recharge in 5 minutes, with fast chargers on every corner, and a price cheaper than an equivalent ICE." There will always be those people and I don't bother with them because they are unreasonable. But with 150 miles EPA, with a price similar to what the Leaf is now, I would find very few people that could argue with the decision to go for it.

Having said that, I suspect the Leaf will continue to be the entry-level BEV for a while and Nissan may be planning a Rogue or Altima that has more range. I hope they are, as a matter of fact.

 

[jlsoaz]

There is a lot of optimism on pack pricing here.

Just because the 2013 Leaf was able to drop the price some, doesn't mean that trend can continue. There was probably a steep learning curve in saving money. And a big part of the price drop was decontenting. And there was the early adopter penalty vs profit potential from Nissan.

Let's say the Leaf battery is $10k, the consensus seems to want double in a $25k car. How would that be possible? I think a reasonable expectation is 4% decline in price per year so in 4 years, you are still looking at a $18k pack.

Are people really expecting better than a 4% decline in pricing on batteries? This is not memory chips. This is a relatively mature technology - with vast room for improvement for sure.

Or is everyone just dreaming?

I guess I expect a better than a 4% annual decline in manufacturing cost on the finished battery pack product for the next few years, in $/kWh, although I haven't run the exact math. I also expect a drop in price to the buyer, though generally the battery is packaged in to a car and not sold separately, and if-when the separate pack product is sold separately, it may not be priced to make a profit.

Part, but not all, of the difference of opinion here is that we may be starting from different cost and price points. A few years ago the price quoted to one small EV mfgr I spoke with was somewhere around $600 or $700/kWhr and headed for $500/kWhr. I am not sure where you are getting your estimate of $416 $kWhr. I will have to look up some more exact data, but I think it's reasonable to suggest that the curve may be a bit steeper and earlier than you're saying. To some extent it's a mature tech, but to some extent, in my view, it's not. For example, have finished packs been manufactured for 50k+ vehicles per year per model yet? I don't think so, but they are likely to be, soon. I'd be surprised if the costs and prices didn't come down in the next few years a bit more than you're suggesting.

 

[jlsoaz]

I've been following this thread but it is really hard to form an opinion. There are so many factors that determine how many Kwh a vehicle should need. For example, availability of public chargers including DC fast chargers. For the sake of argument, we'll say there will be no change between now and 2016.

One constant factor I've seen among the buying public is that everybody seems to want more capacity. Not only the Leaf, bu the Volt too. And most people saying this seem to be willing to pay for it. The confirmation of this came today when I saw Tesla will no longer offer the low-end battery due to lack of demand. . ...

Thanks, I had a similar thought in reading the Tesla news. I guess what we are talking about here is the marginal utility of adding more kWh. Apologies if I am getting it wrong as to how exactly MU wording and concepts go, but in my own words: Each person I think has a somewhat different marginal utility, but perhaps meaningful discussions can be had not about expecting to match up exactly with each other, but about what our own individual numbers are and, separately, about trying to gauge such numbers in aggregate across a population (whether it is a city, state, country, whatever) and trying to help Nissan and other competing manufacturers where they might be gauging marginal utility about right (or not) for a given population.

So having said that, I do not foresee anyone coming out with a new year model BEV or PHEV that has less EV range than the previous year model. It will either stay the same or it will increase with the new year models.

The Leaf's current 75 mile range is really insufficient for most people around where I live, especially during winter. When I say insufficient, I mean without them having to make a few changes to their routine or lifestyle. Most people won't be willing to do that. I believe 125-150 miles EPA range, or roughly twice what the Leaf currently offers, would be the sweet spot where most people would no longer have an excuse. I mean sure, there will always be the one hold out that says "I'll never change to an EV unless it can do 1,200 miles per charge recharge in 5 minutes, with fast chargers on every corner, and a price cheaper than an equivalent ICE." There will always be those people and I don't bother with them because they are unreasonable. But with 150 miles EPA, with a price similar to what the Leaf is now, I would find very few people that could argue with the decision to go for it.

Having said that, I suspect the Leaf will continue to be the entry-level BEV for a while and Nissan may be planning a Rogue or Altima that has more range. I hope they are, as a matter of fact.

 

[davewill]

I don't doubt that battery density and prices will decline, but I expect those improvements to go towards making the car cheaper and more profitable...both of which need to happen before the federal incentive runs out, and just to keep the momentum going. Maybe we'll see some minor range improvements if the marketing data indicates it's necessary for sales, but any great increase in range will happen in a new model, not in the LEAF.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

I think we wont see much more range ina LEAF ever. It fills the need of its target segment quite well.

* you will get more range for the same money you are paying today

Huh? :?
I think one BIG reason, if any, that Nissan might add more capacity is to buy themselves more reserve/hidden capacity. If more and more LEAFs start showing up with prematurely degraded batteries, and they aren't going to add TMS, they might consider more capacity so the batteries aren't cycled as often. With 25% more capacity, I would probably never charge to 100%.

say what?? :shock: i think you need to reduce your insurance coverage.

i have to be honest here. this forum is one of the best at taking a solitary 3-4 word phrase in the 5 paragraph post and using it to completely take the post out of context.


lets be clear here. I believe Nissan will offer longer range EVs... just wont be a LEAF, simple as that. The LEAF platform cant really handle it, pure and simple.

now if someone comes up with a battery that has twice the charge for half the weight, then sure! no problem but that is NOT what this is all about.

fact of the matter; the bigger the battery the lower the efficiency. so there is a balance to maintain but its not a seesaw. its weight, performance, space and cost.

The LEAF fills a niche which is the current one. the problem is that most drivers dont realize how well suited that niche is for them. that will come in time thru word of mouth. I expect the price of the LEAF to go down to where the top of the line is about $28-30,000 which means the intro trim level as low as 19,999.

But Nissan will also be attacking other niches. one that will sit in the same price bracket the current LEAF sits in and THAT non LEAF car will have the range we think we need (and 10% of us actually do) and it will be a sedan and from 2 blocks away, it will be completely unidentifiable as an EV. IOW, it will blend into the background so well that the question of "EV huh? so what kind of gas mileage you getting?" will live on for a few more years.

and this thing about Tesla dropping the 40 Kwh car is a testament that "we" are willing to pay more for the range is... ah, quite frankly total BS

 

[keydiver]

I think we wont see much more range ina LEAF ever. It fills the need of its target segment quite well.

* you will get more range for the same money you are paying today

Huh? :?
I think one BIG reason, if any, that Nissan might add more capacity is to buy themselves more reserve/hidden capacity. If more and more LEAFs start showing up with prematurely degraded batteries, and they aren't going to add TMS, they might consider more capacity so the batteries aren't cycled as often. With 25% more capacity, I would probably never charge to 100%.

say what?? :shock: i think you need to reduce your insurance coverage.

What part of what I said don't you understand? Surely I can't be the only one on this Forum who has to charge to 100% fairly regularly, because of uncertainty about where all my day will take me, but it goes against my gut instinct of trying to preserve the integrity of the battery? If I had access to ~70% of a 32 kWh pack, that's more than the ~90% of a 24 kWh pack we have access to now. This is what Volt does to a lesser extent, why doesn't it make sense to you? As I said, I think Nissan would only consider this as an alternative to implementing a TMS.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

Huh? :?
I think one BIG reason, if any, that Nissan might add more capacity is to buy themselves more reserve/hidden capacity. If more and more LEAFs start showing up with prematurely degraded batteries, and they aren't going to add TMS, they might consider more capacity so the batteries aren't cycled as often. With 25% more capacity, I would probably never charge to 100%.

say what?? :shock: i think you need to reduce your insurance coverage.

What part of what I said don't you understand? Surely I can't be the only one on this Forum who has to charge to 100% fairly regularly, because of uncertainty about where all my day will take me, but it goes against my gut instinct of trying to preserve the integrity of the battery? If I had access to ~70% of a 32 kWh pack, that's more than the ~90% of a 24 kWh pack we have access to now. This is what Volt does to a lesser extent, why doesn't it make sense to you? As I said, I think Nissan would only consider this as an alternative to implementing a TMS.

paying for a large battery then never using it is what does not make sense. have you seen the "performance of the Tesla and the RAV? they suck and why? because they are carrying around that 16-36 KWH of insurance that is giving you 10-24 Kwh of additional range. if you can charge to 100% on your LEAF and make it work then there is simply no reason to not do exactly that.

also, there is no real evidence that charging to 93.6% (100% is not possible on the LEAF) is affecting the long term degradation of the battery as long as your charging profile is managed properly which simply means dont charge it and let it sit more than you have to.

we also have VERY strong evidence of people in AZ who NEVER charged to full and still had degradation issues. so that 80% thing really is 95% FUD just like the "only quick charge once a day" proved to be. IOW, its not the charging we need to concern ourselves with, its the heat.

but none of this has to do with what i have been saying. what it really boils down to is that if the LEAF does not fit your needs, get a different car. trust me. in a few years there will be choices in the range that better fits your occasional need. right now, there is not (unless you got an extra 15 grand and live in CA) . The LEAF is what it is and will never be anything other than that but its not like Nissan put out the LEAF and they are done... not like that at all.

this is all i am saying... nothing more

 

[Sublime]

The other day I jokingly told my wife, "The Model S has a 7 seat option, let's sell the minivan and get one". She replied, "Can we take it to Florida?" (500 - 600 miles)

That got me thinking, is that a road trip I'd want to take... even in an 85kWh model S?

At 75mph the 85kWh model S will go about 250 miles. So there would need to be a charging station, perfectly located to make the trip possible.

The point of that rambling in this thread is this: There isn't a huge usability gap (given the current state of charing speeds and locations) between the 24kWh LEAF and an 85kWh Model S (for me). Both are perfectly capable vehicles for 95% of the days out of the year. The over 3x capacity increase of the model S maybe buys me 2% more usability and neither would get me to 100% coverage.

So until a 300 mile range (with AC/Heat at 75mph) 5/7 passanger car can be charged in 30 minutes with charging stations available at least every 100 miles, I don't see road trippin' in a BEV. So what's the point of something over say 30kWh if its not about 100kWh?