CR's 2013 "Would you buy your car again?" survey

[JimSouCal]

would never have bought a Leaf if I had a commute like that, even if I had an L2 charging station at work. And I suspect Nissan wasn't counting on very many people buying the car and deep cycling the battery every single day like that.

Well, then I suppose you're entitled to your opinion. I happen to differ.

I still feel like a 30 mile one way (60 RT) with L2 charging at work is totally doable, and more so with the newer charger the recent models...

 

[mwalsh]

I still feel like a 30 mile one way (60 RT) with L2 charging at work is totally doable, and more so with the newer charger the recent models...

It's doable with L1...no worries. It's just not what I expected to deal with at this stage of the game. 5 years in...maybe. 8 years in...most likely. And my way past it ever becoming a problem would be to purchase a new pack. Or at least that was the theory. :?

 

[gbarry42]

In 2010, the holdouts changed their minds because you could buy the car, not lease it. Bad memories of the EV-1.
In 2014, the focus shifts to the battery. Many will hold out until...you can buy a battery, not lease it. History is interesting.

Discussion of recent buyers makes me wonder about the issues with the Tennessee-built cars. The power control module problems and misplaced water drain problems come to mind. But I don't know if that's a significant percentage. I know the forum threads make it look that way.

 

[evnow]

Hmmm .... I actually leased again. I'm hoping I can lease a different car by 2015, May. But I'm afraid Leaf will continue to be the one that makes most sense. There is nothing in the horizon that can beat Leaf's value, until Model E lands in '17 or so.

 

[walterbays]

I am in the same camp. I bought the car with reduced expectations of the battery as compared to others. On the other hand, I expected much greater quick charge deployment. I remain happy (so far) with the LEAF.

Me too. But I don't think mwalsh's expectations were unreasonable. Nissan touted 100 mile range and 70% battery in 10 years, so he could have expected 70 miles at the end of 10 years, adequate for his 61 mile requirement. As backup he could count the promise of widespread L2 and QC infrastructure, the possibility of L2 charging at work, the expectation that Nissan would of course offer replacement batteries for sale, and the expectation that future batteries would have higher capacity and lower price.

Myself, I made sure the car had ample range for my daily commute, plus occasional errands doubling that mileage, plus occasional evening trips downtown, even with battery degradation to 70% in 10 years. There were to be charging stations at many retailers like Starbucks and movie theaters and there were to be something like 40 QC stations in town within a year or two - probably at least 20 by the time my car arrived. If anything unexpected happened I'd just go to my neighborhood Arco station, which planned to install a QC, for a quick fill up. Instead there are 3 operational QC stations in the region, plus 3 Blink QC stations one of which is definitely broken and the other two which might or might not work. There are also 2 new evGo stations which are scheduled to become operational "any day now" - the same status those 40 Blink stations had for the past couple of years.

Edit: I forgot about the Nissan QC! Thanks to Mossy Nissan dealers the local situation isn't nearly as bad as it might be. (end edit)

The car still works fine for me because, as an engineer, I was so conservative in my assumptions. But also I thought that Nissan would be conservative in its engineering assumptions. Sure I was making a bet buying the car, but Nissan was betting the company on the car. They had been testing batteries for decades, including years of testing in the Arizona desert heat. They had much more information than I did about battery performance and future battery developments. If they'd bet the company on battery degradation to 70% in 10 years worldwide including places like Arizona then I'd bet the way the smart money was betting and purchase the car rather than lease.

I still recommend Leaf for people whose driving patterns fit its real world range. But in the absence of a battery replacement price I can only recommend leasing, not purchase. And if I were shopping today it would be a close decision between leasing a new Leaf and buying a Chevy Volt with thermal management and, in the absence of much public charging infrastructure, the real world ability to go about the same EV distance as Leaf.

 

[jhm614]

Hey, I did my homework. Or so I thought. In 2010 Nissan was promoting 80% capacity at 8 years and 70% at 10 years. 80% of 85 miles is 68 miles. 70% of 85 miles is 60 miles. My commute is 61 miles.

Your commute being 61 miles is exactly what I'm talking about. I would never have bought a Leaf if I had a commute like that, even if I had an L2 charging station at work. And I suspect Nissan wasn't counting on very many people buying the car and deep cycling the battery every single day like that.

I don't remember the 80% @ 8 years but I do remember the 80% @ 5 year with the proviso that higher mileage would reduce this. (Not saying that someone from Nissan didn't say 80% @ 8 years, just that it might not have been as widely publicized as the 80% @ 5 years with the milage caveat.)

One thing about the commute length -- Nissan may have had a pretty good idea of how many people were planning on that length of commute. Didn't all the $99 early adopters have to do a web based "application" where you entered your daily commute? That would have also been the perfect time to warn of potential problems...

 

[mwalsh]

I don't remember the 80% @ 8 years but I do remember the 80% @ 5 year with the proviso that higher mileage would reduce this. (Not saying that someone from Nissan didn't say 80% @ 8 years, just that it might not have been as widely publicized as the 80% @ 5 years with the milage caveat.)

Those numbers were out there. If you do a Google search with a date range of Jan 2010 to Jan 2011, you'll find it quoted plenty. We didn't start to hear/see 80% in 5 years until the disclosure form we had to sign when purchasing. And, since I got my car ahead of most of you, I was amongst the first to hear about it. And I let it go because a) I really, really wanted my car and b) I trusted Nissan had their stuff together, so it would never be a concern. Hmm...

 

[thankyouOB]

this process is reflective and not without some pain. turns out i am lucky.

i remember a focus group at the edison hq site in la county, where, after all the work/discussion inside, they took us outside and paired us with a nissan investigator, who had been watching through a two-way mirror.
they asked each of us some specifics based on our comments.
I told them i was happy, noting that when i bought the car i made a bet on Nissan though i had some doubts (you all reflect them above). I concluded and told them that "after more than a year of ownership, i thought things had worked out well. the bet was good."
that feeling is different today.
i am happy with the car. my circumstance keeps it useful for my primary purpose, commuting to work and back over 50 miles. i also am able to L1 in the parking garage at work (which keeps me from deep dipping the battery) and there are L2s if i need a quick charge, which has happened about 3-4 times.

but the long-range prospects for battery range and battery repurchase are bleaker. if i had known that the battery was not for sale as replacement part, i would not have bought, as i say earlier in the thread above.
i would also say that to people who ask me about the car. i do love the car, but i feel cheated, especially so because of the SYB. That is no answer for buyers.

 

[Valdemar]

I was certainly lured in by their 5y/80% claim. Just slightly over year 2 and already close to losing second capacity bar. I didn't expect it to happen for 3 more years.

 

[nosuchthing]

My wife is the principle driver of our Leaf. I bought it for my 84-mile commute as a 100-mile car.

Ha-ha! Didn't work out! If they had said 73 miles I would have stayed away. This is Japanese style - never tell the truth or the whole truth. And apologize readily for misinforming you. How nice.

Wife is rally pissed off car has only 60+ mile range now. So it would not fly with her again. She fills in with the Spark now. It has true 82-mile range, up to 115 miles at 35-45 mph. Otherwise, I prefer Leaf 10 times over. You know, Chevy. Half-baked design and just about everything on the wrong side or a wrong place. The only most amazing thing about Spark is a perfect GOM. Somehow they pulled it off to perfection.

As far as Leaf, none of us knew what we were getting ourselves into. Now we're stuck with a car that has lost 12,000 bucks of purchase value (22,000 bucks of showroom value - let's face it) on par with BMW and Mercedes. :lol:

So. Lease only, and that's a definite maybe. :mrgreen:

And yes, WE ARE WAITING TO SWAP THAT BATTERY FOR SOMETHING BETTER, NISSAN !

 

[sparky]

This thread is a brand marketer's dream.
Lots of good responses here and requiring some soul searching, I think.
My LEAF is beginning it's 4th year (11/2010 build date). The car has performed flawlessly for what my wife and I needed; dependable transport that we could power from our roof. No gas stations, enough room, decent price (easily with $12.5k incentive) and fun to drive. I think I took delivery a few days after mwalsh and on the same day/dealer as MalloryK in early Jan '11.
Still have 12 bars. It's my wife's car now. Her commute is less than 30 mi/day.

But no; I don't think I'd buy the same LEAF now. EVs are here, Nissan did great things with this model but the LEAF is in need of a serious update in order to get me to drop $30k (or $15k on a lease). The 60 mi freeway range gives us trouble on some days when there's just more driving than planned or we fail to do a 100% charge and need it later.
Same car (please, a little sportier handling) but a real range of 100 mi in the same form factor and price range is overdue. Tesla cracked the code; electric performance + range == happiness.

 

[smkettner]

Less than 50 miles today to LBW and not even 3 yo. Purchase again.... are you kidding me.
If I end up with a better battery after a free warranty replacement I may change my story.
In the mean time the range is pathetic. Commute is 21 miles round trip but I really need a solid 90 to 140 miles.

 

[JimSouCal]

I am in the same camp. I bought the car with reduced expectations of the battery as compared to others. On the other hand, I expected much greater quick charge deployment. I remain happy (so far) with the LEAF.

Me too. But I don't think mwalsh's expectations were unreasonable. Nissan touted 100 mile range and 70% battery in 10 years, so he could have expected 70 miles at the end of 10 years, adequate for his 61 mile requirement. As backup he could count the promise of widespread L2 and QC infrastructure, the possibility of L2 charging at work, the expectation that Nissan would of course offer replacement batteries for sale, and the expectation that future batteries would have higher capacity and lower price.

Myself, I made sure the car had ample range for my daily commute, plus occasional errands doubling that mileage, plus occasional evening trips downtown, even with battery degradation to 70% in 10 years. There were to be charging stations at many retailers like Starbucks and movie theaters and there were to be something like 40 QC stations in town within a year or two - probably at least 20 by the time my car arrived. If anything unexpected happened I'd just go to my neighborhood Arco station, which planned to install a QC, for a quick fill up. Instead there are 3 operational QC stations in the region, plus 3 Blink QC stations one of which is definitely broken and the other two which might or might not work. There are also 2 new evGo stations which are scheduled to become operational "any day now" - the same status those 40 Blink stations had for the past couple of years.

The car still works fine for me because, as an engineer, I was so conservative in my assumptions. But also I thought that Nissan would be conservative in its engineering assumptions. Sure I was making a bet buying the car, but Nissan was betting the company on the car. They had been testing batteries for decades, including years of testing in the Arizona desert heat. They had much more information than I did about battery performance and future battery developments. If they'd bet the company on battery degradation to 70% in 10 years worldwide including places like Arizona then I'd bet the way the smart money was betting and purchase the car rather than lease.

I still recommend Leaf for people whose driving patterns fit its real world range. But in the absence of a battery replacement price I can only recommend leasing, not purchase. And if I were shopping today it would be a close decision between leasing a new Leaf and buying a Chevy Volt with thermal management and, in the absence of much public charging infrastructure, the real world ability to go about the same EV distance as Leaf.

Well stated so I leave your quote intact. I also agree that MWalsh also has good cause to state his case. Meanwhile, the LEAF will meet my needs for years (but I have ICE back up and wouldn't hesitate to rent if I didn't).

 

[JimSouCal]

Tesla cracked the code; electric performance + range == happiness.

net $$$ out of pocket of course, and let's remember that the Sedan was largely a $90K throw of the dice on ordering from the POV of the consumer... I threw, what, under 20K net for a LEAF?

 

[cwerdna]

I think a factor in the score drop is the appearance of more competitive vehicles.

Ignoring what I know is coming down the pipe (e.g., the B-Electric), I would certainly state that I would buy it again as I would compare it to the current Focus EV, Smart EV and Volt.
...
So I guess my answer would depend heavily on the exact wording of the question and my interpretation of that wording.

Just a reminder for those who don't know the wording of the question...

Per URLs like http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/2010/06/used-car-owner-satisfaction/index.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2012/12/new-car-owner-satisfaction-survey-shows-the-models-that-delight-or-disappoint" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, the question is supposed to be:

Each year Consumer Reports asks the following question on our Annual Auto Survey: "Considering all factors (price, performance, reliability, comfort, etc.), would you get this car if you had it to do all over again?" Respondents have four choices, from "definitely yes" to "definitely no."

Our annual owner-satisfaction survey, conducted by the Consumer Reports National Research Center, asks subscribers a single, revealing question: Considering all factors (price, performance, reliability, comfort, enjoyment, etc.), would they get their same vehicle if they had it to do all over again?

 

[abasile]

If I had the opportunity to relive the last 2.5 years, based on what I know today, I would have kept driving the Prius and saved the money toward a Tesla at a later date. The battery degradation issue notwithstanding, I think the LEAF is a great car. But I really should have held out for something with much more range. Part of this is because I have a commute that I didn't have when the LEAF was purchased. But I've also come to agree with adric22 that it's best if one's regular driving patterns do not come close to pushing the car's range; I am not interested in having to hypermile as a matter of routine. At this point, however, I figure I might as well get as much use out of the LEAF as I reasonably can.

By the way, driving up the mountain today, I had a full charge and was running late for an appointment. So I simply climbed the 4900' at the speed of traffic (55 mph much of the way) and didn't worry about pulling a sustained 40 kW from the battery. Went from a full charge to close to LBW in 23 miles.

 

[WetEV]

Your commute being 61 miles is exactly what I'm talking about. I would never have bought a Leaf if I had a commute like that, even if I had an L2 charging station at work. And I suspect Nissan wasn't counting on very many people buying the car and deep cycling the battery every single day like that.

+1

My calculation went something like this: EPA range is 75 miles. 70% battery at EOL, 80% reserve for unknown daily events, 20% allowance for climate control: Real range of Leaf is 33.6 miles. Yes, pessimistic, but I'd buy the car again.

Battery life, only thing that disappoints is the lack of a replacement cost, which I hope to not need for years. If the car no longer meets my needs, no stinking leased battery for me. A new EV, not a Nissan with a leased battery, if that is the case. Nissan is missing on this leased battery plan, at least for PNW. (yes, it might be a good deal in Florida)

 

[evnow]

My wife is the principle driver of our Leaf. I bought it for my 84-mile commute as a 100-mile car.

Ha-ha! Didn't work out! If they had said 73 miles I would have stayed away. This is Japanese style - never tell the truth or the whole truth. And apologize readily for misinforming you. How nice.

BS.

Nissan clearly said 100 mile in LA4 (city) cycle. They actually get more on that cycle. Apparently you didn't read beyond news headlines. Also, EPA 73 miles was available before you bought Leaf.

While battery degradation issues couldn't have been foreseen, anyone who says they bought Leaf looking at the "100 mile range" didn't do the due diligence.

 

[JimSouCal]

Sorry to be so verbose in this thread, but as others have mentioned, a new and larger replacement battery pack (at a reasonable $) would be helpful to many I am sure... BTW, I'd have leased and not bought (leaving the buy out option at EOL).

 

[KJD]

Would I buy the car again ? No I would not.

If I had it to do all over again, I would look for a 24 month lease instead.

Now if Nissan would just come clean and give us the price of all replacement parts, then I might consider a purchase again.