Full 2013 Nissan LEAF Specs out

[Herm]

Those tires (well, the MXM, not MXV) didn't get significantly less range on my 2012 LEAF.

Has to add 50 pounds and adding 50 pounds has to negatively impact range. I'd be OK with that though, hardly a big deal.

50 pounds is about 1.5% of overall weight. So it will probably take out less than 1% of the range.

50lbs out on the tires is a lot worse than 50lbs in the trunk of the car, the extra rotational inertia will eat up range in city stop and go driving, not so much on the hwy.

How did you guys come up with 50lbs extra for the larger tires?

 

[RegGuheert]

How did you guys come up with 50lbs extra for the larger tires?

This is where I am a little confused. I would tend to think the alloy wheel material would be less dense than the rubber sidewall material, meaning that 17" wheels with 50 series tires would be lighter and have a smaller rotational inertia than 16" wheels with 60 series tires, assuming the outer diameter was the same.

But I admit that intuition can be dead wrong. It would be interesting to weigh them and compare. I suppose Tony has already done that with different wheels. Do you have weights, Tony? Does anyone have a way to measure rotational inertia?

For reference, here is a discussion about weights of Porsche 16- and 17- inch wheels with 245mm width tires. It seems that at that width, the 17" wheels weigh about 1 lb. more than their 16" equivalents and the 17" tires weigh slightly less. Nothing definitive there, but it seems like we could be talking about less than 5 lbs. difference, total.

For further reference, here is a specification table for Michelin Energy Saver A/S tires showing different weights for different tires (expand the table to see weights). Unfortunately, I don't see the P215/50R17 size listed there nor do I see two sizes that I consider to be the same width AND the same height that would allow weights to be compared properly. I do see a P225/50R17 that weighs LESS than a P205/65R16 (22.2 lbs. versus 22.8 lbs.).

I guess my conclusion is that 16" alloy tires/rims are likely slightly lighter than 17, but probably by less than about 5 lbs. total for the car. If anything, the overall weight probably depends more on WHICH tire and wheel are chosen, as some will certainly be lighter than others.

I suppose if you go with 17" you may be paying more for tires, however.

 

[JPWhite]

Just a tone of specs out today...who doesn't want to know the auto on/off headlights are a feature not available on the S trim level? lol

And only an option on the SV. How puzzling.

Are auto-on lights really that expensive? This to me is a basic safety feature. Got it on our 2007 Altima S but Nissan can't put it on a 2013 model vehicle as standard. WTF?

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

I thought I saw that the entire 2013 was 170lbs lighter! Overall its kind of a mehhh upgrade for someone who already has a LEAF. The real question is will these changes and option levels attract new buyers? The price/profitability aspect seems to be the real story for the 2013 model. Time will tell but the LEAF needs some EV model reinforcements. I feel that until Nissan does something VERY bold in the Performance direction or the Range direction, not much will change. Tesla went bold on their second swing and got COTY!

That's what I read about the Japanese spec LEAF. The S is quite a bit lighter and maybe that was the comparison. Another possibility is that the new motor they were touting is expensive to manufacture and they're going to save it for Leaf 2.0.

Still, at least they reduced the SV weight a bit. Every little helps.

 

[speedracer]

Did anyone else catch this ... "Redesigned Level 1 Cord Set". I wonder if this will effect Phil and his upgrade service.



This was in the "2013 Nissan Leaf Product Highlights"

 

[JPWhite]

Did anyone else catch this ... "Redesigned Level 1 Cord Set". I wonder if this will effect Phil and his upgrade service.



This was in the "2013 Nissan Leaf Product Highlights"

I believe it has been determined that the 16Amp 240v upgrade will not be possible just the 12Amp 240v with the new cord set.

 

[palmermd]

I believe it has been determined that the 16Amp 240v upgrade will not be possible just the 12Amp 240v with the new cord set.

We do not know that yet.

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=257629#p257629" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As for the EVSE, it's a new design by Panasonic, so until I can get one for analysis, I won't know it's upgrade potential. Parts for 2013's are not yet available.

 

[TonyWilliams]

I believe it has been determined that the 16Amp 240v upgrade will not be possible just the 12Amp 240v with the new cord set.

We do not know that yet.

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=257629#p257629" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As for the EVSE, it's a new design by Panasonic, so until I can get one for analysis, I won't know it's upgrade potential. Parts for 2013's are not yet available.

It's entirely possible (and probable in my opinion) that this is the same Panasonic unit used on the Prius and Rav4.

Phil has already modified mine to 240v, but could not increase current above the stock 12 amps.

 

[palmermd]

That is what I would have thought, and it appears JP thought as well, so that makes three of us, but Phil must have noted a different model number when he was in Arizona otherwise he would not have responded as he did in the linked post.

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

I believe it has been determined that the 16Amp 240v upgrade will not be possible just the 12Amp 240v with the new cord set.

When you trade in your 2011/2012 on a 2013 as you are making the swap at the dealer: "Oh sorry I lost the cord... here, just take the one from the new one"

 

[JPWhite]

I believe it has been determined that the 16Amp 240v upgrade will not be possible just the 12Amp 240v with the new cord set.

When you trade in your 2011/2012 on a 2013 as you are making the swap at the dealer: "Oh sorry I lost the cord... here, just take the one from the new one"

+1

When contemplating a 2011/2012 upgrade I was planning on doing the same. Once modified one wants to keep hold of your modified portable EVSE.

Alas 2012 inventory was low at most Nashville dealers in December and no killer purchase deals were on offer (just good leases deals). So I've still got my 2011 which is fine by me. Wonder what the deals will look like for the 2013 for an existing LEAF owner.

 

[nater]

Of course, won't you really want the portable to go to 32 A?

Nate

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

So I've still got my 2011 which is fine by me. Wonder what the deals will look like for the 2013 for an existing LEAF owner.

I'm guessing we'd get harpooned.

While the 6.6 charger and heat pump are nice upgrades that will be quite beneficial to some, for the most part this is just your typical mid-cycle facelift. IMO 2011/2012 drivers will be better served by just hanging out, and keep their powder dry for what 2015 or 2016 has in store.

 

[dgpcolorado]

How did you guys come up with 50lbs extra for the larger tires?

This is where I am a little confused. I would tend to think the alloy wheel material would be less dense than the rubber sidewall material, meaning that 17" wheels with 50 series tires would be lighter and have a smaller rotational inertia than 16" wheels with 60 series tires, assuming the outer diameter was the same.

But I admit that intuition can be dead wrong. It would be interesting to weigh them and compare. I suppose Tony has already done that with different wheels. Do you have weights, Tony? Does anyone have a way to measure rotational inertia?

For reference, here is a discussion about weights of Porsche 16- and 17- inch wheels with 245mm width tires. It seems that at that width, the 17" wheels weigh about 1 lb. more than their 16" equivalents and the 17" tires weigh slightly less. Nothing definitive there, but it seems like we could be talking about less than 5 lbs. difference, total.

For further reference, here is a specification table for Michelin Energy Saver A/S tires showing different weights for different tires (expand the table to see weights). Unfortunately, I don't see the P215/50R17 size listed there nor do I see two sizes that I consider to be the same width AND the same height that would allow weights to be compared properly. I do see a P225/50R17 that weighs LESS than a P205/65R16 (22.2 lbs. versus 22.8 lbs.).

I guess my conclusion is that 16" alloy tires/rims are likely slightly lighter than 17, but probably by less than about 5 lbs. total for the car. If anything, the overall weight probably depends more on WHICH tire and wheel are chosen, as some will certainly be lighter than others.

I suppose if you go with 17" you may be paying more for tires, however.

Even if the 17" wheel/tire combination had the same mass as the 16" version it is likely to have higher "rotational inertia", to use Herm's term, which is related to the angular momentum and angular velocity. The main factor is the distribution of mass and the length of the moment arm (essentially, the length of the radius to that mass). Much of the mass of a tire is along the outer edge and a larger radius tire has a longer moment arm, which means higher angular momentum. It takes energy to accelerate/decelerate a rotating mass. The larger the mass and the greater the moment arm the more energy it takes to achieve a given rotational velocity.

At constant highway speeds the angular momentum is also constant so tire weight and size has no (significant) effect. But when accelerating or decelerating the energy needed can be considerable, depending on the mass and moment arm. Unless the mass of a larger wheel/tire is lower or it is distributed closer to the center of rotation, it will use more energy to accelerate or decelerate. That is why smaller and lighter wheels and tires are generally preferred for energy efficiency.

Given all that, I don't "get" the fascination with 17 inch wheels.

 

[JPWhite]

Given all that, I don't "get" the fascination with 17 inch wheels.

Me either.

Until someone pointed out at MNL that the LEAF had smaller wheels than most vehicles, I hadn't even noticed, 16" wheels look fine on the LEAF IMHO.

Wonder if the Michelin tires will be any more durable than the Bridgestone's? My Ecopia's will need replacement before too long and I've got just shy of 20,000 miles.

 

[TomT]

Agreed. I'd have a hard recommending an S to anyone...

There's so many cool things in the higher level trims that aren't in the S.
The price better be a lot less because from my perspective, I'd rather wait and save up to afford a higher trim than settle for the lower-cost, stripped down S. I really want a Leaf but it kinda seems dumb to save up and finally buy an electric car for it only to have a few features.

 

[TomT]

I agree. Nothing has changed that makes me not want to move on to something other than a Leaf when my lease is up... Range, battery degradation and TMS will have to be addressed before I reconsider Leaf.

Looks like specs as rumored and all nice to have, but nothing spectacular to make me personally consider Leaf again. If they managed to bring the price down, these improvements should attract more people. I see one new feature that I really missed not having in Leaf extra regen.

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

When I was a kid my family had one of these... it rode like a dream on 15" wheels.

 

[TomT]

However, weight aside, the 17" tires are 10mm wider and thus almost certain to have more aerodynamic drag.

I guess my conclusion is that 16" alloy tires/rims are likely slightly lighter than 17, but probably by less than about 5 lbs. total for the car. If anything, the overall weight probably depends more on WHICH tire and wheel are chosen, as some will certainly be lighter than others.

 

[JPWhite]

However, weight aside, the 17" tires are 10mm wider and thus almost certain to have more aerodynamic drag.

Hopefully extra width equates to extra grip.