LEAF 2 : What we know so far (2018 or later?)

[NavyCuda]

Some of you anti-ICE people need to get your heads out of the sand. EVs are a minority. They must appeal to the majority for any chance of widespread adoption.

The save the earth mentality drives some people, like me, away.

The EV is a better car. Not because it might help save the earth. Rather because it has such a low operating cost. It's the ultimate bic lighter of a car.

 

[webeleafowners]

I think that Nissan finally figured out that the average person doesn't want an EV to look different, they want it to look indistinguishable from an ICE car.

I don't know. I suppose it depends on the person. I prefer the Iconic look. Our other car is a smart ED convertible so........

 

[Stoaty]

Some of you anti-ICE people need to realize that you are ahead of your time. Give it some time for others to figure out what you already know.

There, I fixed your statement for you.

 

[NavyCuda]

Some of you anti-ICE people need to realize that you are ahead of your time. Give it some time for others to figure out what you already know.

There, I fixed your statement for you.

Technically that's not true...

 

[Newporttom]

Imagine always fitting in

The new #Nissan #LEAF with ProPILOT Park, premieres September 6


YOKOHAMA, Japan (July 1, 2017) – Nissan revealed today that the forthcoming new Nissan LEAF will be the first vehicle in the automaker’s global product lineup equipped with ProPILOT Park. The technology helps drivers park by automatically guiding the car into a parking spot.

ProPILOT Park liberates drivers from one of the most tedious, and at times the most challenging, tasks of driving. It gives you confidence that you can park perfectly.

Sonars and cameras on the new Nissan LEAF effortlessly guide the car into a parallel, angled, front or straight back-in parking spot, reducing driver stress by handling accelerator, braking and steering input. The driver activates the technology in three easy steps, monitors the area around the vehicle and applies the brakes if necessary.

This technology represents another milestone in Nissan’s ongoing commitment to bringing accessible, advanced driver assistance technologies to mainstream vehicles. Set to make driving safer and more enjoyable, the development of ProPILOT technologies is part of Nissan Intelligent Mobility, the company’s blueprint for transforming how cars are driven, powered and integrated into society.

By launching the LEAF, the world’s first mass-market electric vehicle, Nissan established itself as a pioneer in the EV movement. Today, the Nissan LEAF is the world’s best-selling electric vehicle, with more than 270,000 sold worldwide.

http://newsroom.nissan-europe.com/eu/en-gb/media/pressreleases/426196601/imagine-always-fitting-in1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXpiE2tcjqc

So the US doesn't get the Pro-Parking initially. I wonder if it's a software upgrade later, or if you buy one without it, your hosed forever...

 

[jlv]

So the US doesn't get the Pro-Parking initially. I wonder if it's a software upgrade later, or if you buy one without it, your hosed forever...

Well, unlike Tesla, Nissan has shown how well they can roll out vehicle software updates that add or improve features. :lol: :roll:

My stats:
3.5 years with a LEAF: 0 software updates, 1 botched TCU HW update that drains the 12V battery
4 months with a Tesla: 4 seamless OTA software updates

 

[NeilBlanchard]

I think that Nissan finally figured out that the average person doesn't want an EV to look different, they want it to look indistinguishable from an ICE car.

IMO not correct. "Average" person wants his car to look cool and unique. But not in a weird way i.e. not too far from contemporary design. Nothing to do with ICE.

Except, that everybody's expectations of what a car "should" look like is based on what ICE cars look like. And ICE cars are designed around a much greater need for cooling. EV's do not require much cooling, and since they are more limited in range, having lower drag - and therefore a much smaller grill. Different is (unfortunately) NOT good for many/most people.

 

[soldcake]

Well, unlike Tesla, Nissan has shown how well they can roll out vehicle software updates that add or improve features. :lol: :roll:

My stats:
3.5 years with a LEAF: 0 software updates, 1 botched TCU HW update that drains the 12V battery
4 months with a Tesla: 4 seamless OTA software updates

software engineer is expensive for a well established japanese automaker.

 

[soldcake]

I don't know. I suppose it depends on the person. I prefer the Iconic look. Our other car is a smart ED convertible so........

my wife aways wanted that. We are waiting for our son to leave for college in 10yrs.

i would have bought a iMiev. it is cute and practical. but because its small battery capacity and nearest iMiev-certified dealer not willing to reduce price..... i bought a leaf.

 

[Dooglas]

The save the earth mentality drives some people, like me, away.

I presume that is true, as you say it is. Fortunately for your grandchildren, there are many of us who do consider factors such as the sustainability of the Earth and its resources. If you can get a better car and help address some of our serious global issues at the same time, I'll be darned if I know why that wouldn't be a good idea.

 

[NavyCuda]

The save the earth mentality drives some people, like me, away.

I presume that is true, as you say it is. Fortunately for your grandchildren, there are many of us who do consider factors such as the sustainability of the Earth and its resources. If you can get a better car and help address some of our serious global issues at the same time, I'll be darned if I know why that wouldn't be a good idea.

I don't have children. I'm not going to have children. So if pollution kills everyone in two generations, I don't care.

 

[GetOffYourGas]

The save the earth mentality drives some people, like me, away.

I presume that is true, as you say it is. Fortunately for your grandchildren, there are many of us who do consider factors such as the sustainability of the Earth and its resources. If you can get a better car and help address some of our serious global issues at the same time, I'll be darned if I know why that wouldn't be a good idea.

I don't have children. I'm not going to have children. So if pollution kills everyone in two generations, I don't care.

What a wonderful attitude :roll:

 

[GRA]

I presume that is true, as you say it is. Fortunately for your grandchildren, there are many of us who do consider factors such as the sustainability of the Earth and its resources. If you can get a better car and help address some of our serious global issues at the same time, I'll be darned if I know why that wouldn't be a good idea.

I don't have children. I'm not going to have children. So if pollution kills everyone in two generations, I don't care.

What a wonderful attitude :roll:

OTOH, most human actions are based on short or long-term self-interest, so as long as it's not going to impact him or anyone he cares about, why should he care? The earth will survive regardless. It's certainly arguable that on the whole it might be better off without us, and given the unlikelihood that we're the only sentient species in the universe let alone a particularly critical one, our survival is probably of no importance (except to us).

Besides, having kids is the single greatest environmental impact anyone can have, as their impact continues unto the nth generation including all their descendants, and the greatest underlying cause of most environmental problems is the sheer number of humans. His not having any will reduce future environmental impact more than any other single step he might take, regardless of his reason for doing so. I made the same decision about the time I was sixteen, and although the environmental impact of my descendants wasn't my primary reason, it was a factor. The world's population has increased by 150% in my lifetime, and projections are that it will have more than tripled before I die, so everyone who chooses not to propagate is helpful.

So for someone like him, we have to come up with other reasons to switch, and fortunately there are many to choose from. Reducing local air pollution will directly impact his quality of life. Energy/national security is another reason. An economic argument, while currently somewhat hard to make in North America, works for an increasing number of people. Acceleration/quietness/smoothness. Reduced maintenance. Pick whichever one(s) work for you.

 

[GetOffYourGas]

I don't have children. I'm not going to have children. So if pollution kills everyone in two generations, I don't care.

What a wonderful attitude :roll:

OTOH, most human actions are based on short or long-term self-interest, so as long as it's not going to impact him or anyone he cares about, why should he care? The earth will survive regardless. It's certainly arguable that on the whole it might be better off without us, and given the unlikelihood that we're the only sentient species in the universe let alone a particularly critical one, our survival is probably of no importance (except to us).

Besides, having kids is the single greatest environmental impact anyone can have, as their impact continues unto the nth generation including all their descendants, and the greatest underlying cause of most environmental problems is the sheer number of humans. His not having any will reduce future environmental impact more than any other single step he might take, regardless of his reason for doing so. I made the same decision about the time I was sixteen, and although the environmental impact of my descendants wasn't my primary reason, it was a factor. The world's population has increased by 150% in my lifetime, and projections are that it will have more than tripled before I die, so everyone who chooses not to propagate is helpful.

So for someone like him, we have to come up with other reasons to switch, and fortunately there are many to choose from. Reducing local air pollution will directly impact his quality of life. Energy/national security is another reason. An economic argument, while currently somewhat hard to make in North America, works for an increasing number of people. Acceleration/quietness/smoothness. Reduced maintenance. Pick whichever one(s) work for you.

How existentialist of you, Guy. I, on the other hand, believe in a much deeper reality. This physical world, while important, is only part of our reality. We are spiritual creatures as much as physical ones, and our souls matter too. And by "our", I am including every single person: you, me, NavyCuda, all 8 billion of us sharing the earth today. I have never met you guys and probably never will. But your physical and spiritual well being are just as important to me as my own. And so in support at least of the former, I will work to preserve our Earth's capability of supporting human life to the best of my ability. It saddens me that NavyCuda feels the way he does, but there's nothing I can do about it.

As for other reasons to consider EVs, I completely agree. There are plenty. My #1 reason is much more political / macro economical based. I probably won't save money with my Leaf (versus keeping the Civic I traded for it). But I now use locally produced electricity instead of 100% imported (to NYS) gasoline. So I support my county, my state, and to a lesser degree my nation. But that doesn't mean it's the only thing that matters. The car is convenient (when used within its range), fun, and doesn't pollute my own air with fumes and noise (yes, noise pollution is a problem).

But we digress. There's probably a better thread for discussing reasons for considering EVs. But I'm just following the conversation where I found it.

 

[NavyCuda]

How existentialist of you, Guy. I, on the other hand, believe in a much deeper reality. This physical world, while important, is only part of our reality. We are spiritual creatures as much as physical ones, and our souls matter too. And by "our", I am including every single person: you, me, NavyCuda, all 8 billion of us sharing the earth today. I have never met you guys and probably never will. But your physical and spiritual well being are just as important to me as my own. And so in support at least of the former, I will work to preserve our Earth's capability of supporting human life to the best of my ability. It saddens me that NavyCuda feels the way he does, but there's nothing I can do about it.

As for other reasons to consider EVs, I completely agree. There are plenty. My #1 reason is much more political / macro economical based. I probably won't save money with my Leaf (versus keeping the Civic I traded for it). But I now use locally produced electricity instead of 100% imported (to NYS) gasoline. So I support my county, my state, and to a lesser degree my nation. But that doesn't mean it's the only thing that matters. The car is convenient (when used within its range), fun, and doesn't pollute my own air with fumes and noise (yes, noise pollution is a problem).

But we digress. There's probably a better thread for discussing reasons for considering EVs. But I'm just following the conversation where I found it.

That is something I really enjoy about forums that social media cannot replicate. An actual conversation, perhaps even an indepth debate can occur on a forum unrelated to the original topic. Sure there is always the risk of it turning into a name calling match and I've certainly been guilty of that offense!

On one hand I'm genuinely appreciative of your concern for my emotional well being. On the other hand, it is mighty presumptuous of you to be concerned with another person that you don't personally know. So am I telling you thank you and to pound sand at the same time? I don't even know!

I've said it before, there are a number of reasons why the EV is a better car, especially in the commuter class. I'm almost at 66,000km on my 2015 I bought 2 years, one week ago. It is easily paying for it self in fuel and maintenance savings. It's nicer to drive everyday than my Infiniti. It doesn't have a bad attitude like the Infiniti.

I really just hate the green aspect of the car, how snobby some people are in the efforts to save the world without ever considering the grand picture. Our climate has been going in cycles for as long as we've had an atmosphere. Thousands of years of recorded history is not a large enough sample size when we're considering how many millions of years old Earth is. A century is not even a statistical error. I believe climate change is real. I'm not convinced we have had or can have any meaningful effect on our changing climate. When I see carbon tax grabs and emissions equipment that forces efficient engines to burn more fuel to burn cleaner, red flags pop up for me. People making a big deal out of diesel particulates like it's going to kill everyone is a joke. Second hand smoking has a better chance of getting you.

So I'm one of those guys who works everyday to service debt and just creep ahead every year. I'm watching our government throw money away on green projects while shutting down long term revenue streams and then increasing taxes. In that context, I do not care one iota about saving the Earth. I'd rather our government sell as much oil to the people who still want to buy it and use that money to upgrade our infrastructure, to build long term renewable, sustainable energy sources so we can be self sufficient.

So all the Greens who want to throw the baby out with the bathwater, you can pound sand. Those of you who believe the environment is effected by Humans, but are willing to look at ways to save the Earth without burdening the tax-payer, you've got my support.

 

[Stoaty]

On the other hand, it is mighty presumptuous of you to be concerned with another person that you don't personally know.

That has got to be one of the strangest comments I've heard in a long time. My guess is that trait developed because it had positive survival value to the human race. There is evidence for a genetic component to empathy:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/15/health/empathy-genes/

Our climate has been going in cycles for as long as we've had an atmosphere. Thousands of years of recorded history is not a large enough sample size when we're considering how many millions of years old Earth is. A century is not even a statistical error. I believe climate change is real. I'm not convinced we have had or can have any meaningful effect on our changing climate.

It's a shame to see this anti-science viewpoint creep in here. By the way, it's a uniquely American phenomenon that is much less common in the rest of the world.

 

[NavyCuda]

It's a shame to see this anti-science viewpoint creep in here. By the way, it's a uniquely American phenomenon that is much less common in the rest of the world.

I don't believe it's anti-science at all. In fact it's a reality, accepting that our dataset is inherently flawed due to the small sample size. We don't have enough data to make any broad conclusions. There certainly is evidence to support the concept of man effect on climate change but if I'm honest with myself I must absolutely consider that current science has it all wrong.

If you can give me a sample of 10% of earths history and be able to point to an absolute trend, then you will convince me. Problem is, we still don't actually know for sure how old the Earth is. We have a good idea, but we're not 100% positive.

 

[Bufordleaf]

NavyCuda, you will not win a debate with folks regarding AGW no matter what facts you throw at them. Just as they will not convince you that AGW is a real and present danger no matter how many scientific studies they throw at you. I would think it would be more productive for those on this forum to focus on the areas that conservatives and liberals can agree on regarding EVs, similar to what GRA was doing in his previous post.

Not saying we all need to sing Kumbaya, just that AGW seems to be a deadlocked issue with anyone whose mind is made up.

 

[LeftieBiker]

OTOH, most human actions are based on short or long-term self-interest, so as long as it's not going to impact him or anyone he cares about, why should he care? The earth will survive regardless. It's certainly arguable that on the whole it might be better off without us, and given the unlikelihood that we're the only sentient species in the universe let alone a particularly critical one, our survival is probably of no importance (except to us).

I do care about the rest of the planet's ecosystems, though. If humans were to get a human-specific epidemic and die out, and somehow there weren't any major disasters as a result, then the above opinion might be valid. As it is, we are endangering at least most of the larger species on the planet, as well as whole ecosystems like coral reefs.

So, does my earlier argument that the most logical path for Nissan to take for Leaf 2 would be to reuse as much of the car as possible make more sense to you folks, now that early hints seem to be indicating that?

 

[Firetruck41]

... So, does my earlier argument that the most logical path for Nissan to take for Leaf 2 would be to reuse as much of the car as possible make more sense to you folks, now that early hints seem to be indicating that?

The hints must be real subtle.