C&D 3/2014 EV comparo (Leaf, Smart, Fiat, Spark, Fit, FFE)

[cwerdna]

Not sure if this has been posted yet... I received the print issue of Car and Driver awhile ago but the article's finally up online.

http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/2014-chevy-spark-ev-vs-fiat-500e-ford-focus-electric-honda-fit-ev-nissan-leaf-smart-fortwo-ed-comparison-test" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

2014 Chevrolet Spark EV vs. 2013 Fiat 500E, 2014 Ford Focus Electric, 2013 Honda Fit EV, 2013 Nissan Leaf SL, 2013 Smart Fortwo ED Cabriolet
Field of Dreams: We gather six government-compliant electric appliances for the quietest, slowest comparo ever.
...

Rankings were

+ Sixth: 2013 Smart Fortwo ED Cabriolet
+ Fifth: 2013 Fiat 500E
+ Fourth: 2013 Nissan Leaf SL
+ Third: 2013 Honda Fit EV
+ Second: 2014 Ford Focus Electric
+ First: 2014 Chevrolet Spark EV

As I basically wrote elsewhere a week or so ago:
I received the C&D issue. Although I'm not sure how I'd rank the vehicles, I recall they missed many points.

IIRC, they didn't touch on DC FC at all. Out of the vehicles they tested, only the Leaf and Spark EV have any DC FC capability. It seems like they didn't use it at all nor discuss it at all. And, we know how widespread CHAdeMO is vs. Frankenplug.

They should've dinged the Spark EV more for its slow OBC and J1772 CCS. But, as C&D is a more performance-oriented publication, I can see why they ranked the vehicles how they did. They also should've dinged the Focus EV more for its TINY trunk.

It's a little odd that they left out the Rav4 EV since they included CA compliance cars like the Spark EV, Fit EV, Fiat 500e and very limited availability Smart ED (~9 states, IIRC). In effect, they reviewed 4 cars that are unavailable to most of the US.

I also recall they gave no info about what their range test consisted of nor test protocol (i.e. how low did they drive it? until the car stopped? Did they add numbers from the GOMs (guess-o-meters) to driven distance?) I suspect it was a lot of high speed driving and the cold that sapped the range of their test vehicles (esp. the Fit EV). I'm surprised Fit EV did the worst in their range test, at 52 miles. In their test, the Spark EV achieved 66 miles, Focus EV 64 and Leaf 64.

FWIW, in the test at http://www.edmunds.com/fuel-economy/testing-electric-vehicles-in-the-real-world.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, the '13 Fit EV beat out their '11 (battery degraded) Leaf, and '12 Focus EV.

The tow generator they showed above "Three little piggies suckle at the teats of Nissan's generator" looks identical to what I've seen Nissan bring to events (e.g. Alt Car Expo), including the Armada SUV and a CHAdeMO DC FC that's part of the whole rig. I put up pics of it at https://picasaweb.google.com/105684180251177299188/AltCarExpo2012?authkey=Gv1sRgCITZzJvF9JKo2QE#" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. Did they not receive it or they just decided to conveniently ignore it?

 

[RegGuheert]

Thanks for the link!

What I find interesting with these EV reviews is that the LEAF is NEVER first, and often is last or close to last. But in the marketplace the LEAF is first and has been for quite some time and will be for the foreseeable future.

What that tells me is that these reviews are based on criteria which do not match the criteria that actual customers use when determining what to purchase. cwerdna has touched on the main ones: availability and QC. I think another factor which reviewers do not touch on is the market's perception of the manufacturer's commitment to the space.

 

[cwerdna]

Thanks for the link!

What I find interesting with these EV reviews is that the LEAF is NEVER first, and often is last or close to last. But in the marketplace the LEAF is first and has been for quite some time and will be for the foreseeable future.

You're welcome.

Yep on the marketplace, at least in EVs in its price range. If we were to rank these same cars in US sales for January 2014 (figures from http://insideevs.com/january-2014-plug-in-electric-vehicle-sales-report-card/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false, they'd be this:

6: Honda Fit EV: 30 (apparently hard to get)
5: Fiat 500E estimated: 80
4. Spark EV: 93
3: Smart ED: 97
2: FFE: 100
1: Leaf : 1,252

The FFE sales numbers are a bit of a puzzle (or not) but are laughable compared to their claims back in 2010: http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1050639_2012-ford-focus-electric-will-surpass-volt-on-volume-but-not-leaf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

Ford expects to build more Focus Electrics in 2012 than the "10,000 to 15,000" Volts Chevy has said it will build in 2011. The Ford total won't quite reach the 20,000 Nissan Leafs expected for 2011.

That puts the number of 2012 Ford Focus Electrics around 15,000, a higher total than the 5,000 or so that some analysts had projected.

But yet from http://www.hybridcars.com/december-2012-dashboard" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, the sales numbers were this for 2012:
FFE: 685
Leaf: 9,819
Volt: 23,461

 

[LeftieBiker]

If the Leaf were equipped with just good (not great) performance tires, and the NISMO chip, it would come in first or second in their tests. There is a link here somewhere to a piece in which a car tester of some sort got the Leaf to pull just about 1 G on the track, using $100 tires.

Keep in mind that these magazines have a track record - so to speak - of picking real Losers as the best cars. Motor Trend was infamous for that for a while.

 

[garsh]

There is a link here somewhere to a piece in which a car tester of some sort got the Leaf to pull just about 1 G on the track, using $100 tires.

That was C&D as well: The (Nearly) 1.0-g Nissan Leaf: Getting an EV to Grip Like a 911
To do that, they removed all the doors and installed $200 track tires.

 

[LeftieBiker]

There is a link here somewhere to a piece in which a car tester of some sort got the Leaf to pull just about 1 G on the track, using $100 tires.

That was C&D as well: The (Nearly) 1.0-g Nissan Leaf: Getting an EV to Grip Like a 911
To do that, they removed all the doors and installed $200 track tires.

I don't remember anything about removing doors! You sure about that? Also, they did get just under 1G with $100 tires; it took another hundred a piece to get from about .95G to 1G.

I just read the piece. Different test. The $100 tires that got another Leaf to just under 1G weren't Yokohamas. Talk about asinine restrictions - limiting themselves to one brand?!?

 

[user 10599]

Having test driven the Spark, Focus, and Smart before buying my Leaf, I can think they are off base in their assessments. And the market sales numbers suggest that I have a better sense for what makes a good car than these guys in this case.

They seem to present their anti-electric stance in the first couple paragraphs. At least going into the article, you are on notice of their viewpoint.

It is interesting that they place so much scoring weight on the performance, yet knock the cars as losers. Did they do all their tests with eco mode on? Each of the cars I tested had plenty of zip and get even better with eco mode off? And they completely ignore the real price (i.e., after the tax incentives). A non-convertible Smart ED after incentives is a $15k car. Not a lot of good car choices for less than $15k. So these are hardly losers in value. And they completely ignore the economic savings of the lower fuel costs, the savings on oil changes, etc. over the life of the car.

I particularly like their assertion (in a sidebar) that these aren't environmentally friendly because in their testing they used diesel generators to charge the cars. How many EV drivers charge that way? I read an article in the paper recently that pointed out a large number of EV buyers have solar panels.

As for the actual comparison, I'm a bit puzzled. I will acknowledge my purchase was a tough choice between the FFE, Volt and the Leaf. The Spark wasn't even a contender - the ride just didn't feel solid. Yet these guys praise it's performance? Okay, perhaps it was able to complete a slolum run with a better time. As I usually drive MB, I realize there are many fine subtleties that make a car a pleasure to drive. Conversely, I liked the FFE, Volt and Leaf. In fairness, I will disclose my biases - 1) I like solid feeling cars with a good road ride (which does weight my assessments against smaller cars such as the Spark and Smart; 2) I avoid first year production runs which ruled out all but the Leaf and Volt, but if I had to make my decision based on each of the cars already past that point, the FFE is a real contender.

But I guess they are the experts on what makes a good car. Oh wait, the consumers (based on sales volume) seem to agree with me. Hmmm....

 

[user 10599]

One other thing about their mockery of the prices. The cars are clearly priced at a level that is to be competitive with traditional cars on an after incentive basis. Over time, as the incentives drop, so will the price. The incentives help the companies get more per car so they can better absorb the huge R&D costs with deploying this new tech. And it helps consumers be willing to try this new tech.

As the consumers learn about these cars, adoption should go up. With higher sales volumes, production costs should drop.

Odd they chose to call it economic lunacy by the car companies. When I was in Economics, the objective of price theory was to maximize the profit. If due to the limited willingness of consumers to adopt such a new tech, they are only going to be able to sell x number of cars at this point, what price do you set to get those sold and get the best profit numbers? That is usually the highest price the highly elastic market will bear. First you start high and get the most $ you can from those early adopters who aren't price sensitive. Then you gradually lower the price to collect the $ from the next tier down and so on.

With the incentives, the entry level Leaf is directly competitive with a comparably equipped Civic, Jetta or Corolla. And as noted in another thread on this forum, the Leaf will have a much lower total ownership cost over the life of the vehicle thanks to lower fuel cost, no oil changes, etc. So the car companies are offering us a huge bargain - we just need the buying public to get over their fear of the new tech and realize these can work very well for many consumer's needs. Yes, it does require some adapting of habits and one could get into a bind if after a long day's commute you forget to plug it in for the night. Of course, some of those issues can be mitigated once a better charging infrastructure is in place.

So, who has the better understanding of economics - the writers or the econ professionals at the car companies?