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

[LeftieBiker]

The hints must be real subtle.

Seriously? Look at the vid in the latest topic on this.

https://youtu.be/q8Yw2POu82g

 

[Dooglas]

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.

Convince you? Convince you of what? You already told us that "if pollution kills everyone in two generations, I don't care". Doesn't that pretty much end the discussion as far as you are concerned?

 

[Firetruck41]

The hints must be real subtle.

Seriously? Look at the vid in the latest topic on this.

Huh? That vid is just the spy pics from several weeks ago, set to music. The same pics which I mentioned, look to me, to confirm it is a different platform. There are quite a few differences to my eye (looks like a new model, not a cosmetic refresh on same platform), but it must look nearly the same as current Leaf to you. I guess we disagree.

 

[LeftieBiker]

The interior looks to be about 70% the same (note the doors), including the same HVAC controls and shifter area. The exterior is so obviously a Leaf "1" with a new nose and rear that it was being called a "test mule" when the pictures were first shown. But hey, 8 weeks and we'll know.

 

[o00scorpion00o]

Has no one figured out yet that this is "not" a new model but a facelift ? Too much of the old car remains , the entire middle section for instance looks identical then there's too much of the old car inside too. This is Nissan dramatically cutting costs and thinking Propilot is enough to tempt new buyers.

Who would buy this over the Bolt ? 200 HP and 240 miles !!! Sure, I might not have much choice but to get this updated model in 2018 when My Lease ends in January but I'm strongly thinking about buying the Ioniq, it's a nice car and it has good efficiency and it charges at 65 Kw as I have personally witnessed on my test drive. 23-90% in 25 mins flat ! Nissan had better have more than 45-50 Kw or it's a definite no no for me !

Even if this Leaf has 40 Kwh , that's not much good if it has poor efficiency, the Renault Zoe with 40 Kwh gets maybe only 40 Kms more than an Ioniq can achieve with 28 Kwh. The Ioniq is also due a battery upgrade in 2018.

If this is the best Nissan can do since 2009 then it's a sad time for them , at least they should have a dedicated EV platform by now and have all the electrics and battery as part of the chassis and not built like an ICE car with all the wasted space !

You'd also think by now that Nissan would have more than 1 EV model , yes they have the Micra EV but it's not sold outside Japan + it's limited production I believe at present.

Have to say that I'm seriously thinking about giving this so called leaf II a miss, it's a shane GM decided to forget about the right hand market when making the Bolt but now that PSA have taken over Opel they might perhaps make a RHD EV with the Bolt drivetrain !

 

[LeftieBiker]

Who would buy this over the Bolt ?

If it's much less expensive to buy or lease than the Bolt, has 140 miles of range, QC standard, and the interior comfort of the current Leaf with another 25+HP and better working headlights, then I will. Cheerfully. I have no desire to drive a fast but crude little box with terrible seats.

 

[IssacZachary]

Has no one figured out yet that this is "not" a new model but a facelift ? Too much of the old car remains , the entire middle section for instance looks identical then there's too much of the old car inside too.

And what's wrong with keeping some of the old Leaf in a Leaf? Car companies that go away from an original model's looks, even looks that nobody seems to likes, don't end up attracting the original enthusiasts.

Take VW for an example. Although their original Beetle was ridiculed for looking like a "pregnant roller-skate" it became the best selling car with a single platform in history. Yet when the New Beetle came out it was considered too far away from the original design to attract VW enthusiasts, and ended up being more or less a college girl car and did not sell anywhere near as well as the original Beetle. But the most recent VW Beetle has been redesigned closer to the original looks of the early Beetle. Ford has done the same with the Mustang. The Beetle and the Mustang were two of the best selling cars in history for a reason. Going away from the original looks didn't help and the car companies ended up going back to the original looks. The Nissan Leaf is the best selling electric car in history. Making a whole new car that's not a Leaf just so that you can label it as a Leaf makes no sense to me. If you don't like Leafs then go buy a Tesla or a Bolt.

Yes, there are some companies that get by with calling their cars the same name yet changing the whole vehicle every few years like the Toyota Camry. But when I go to check out new Camrys none of them strike me with a feeling of familiarity. I owned a 1985 Camry back in my day. But having owned a VW Beetle and a Camry, if I went out to get a new gasoline powered car I'd be attracted to the Beetle's looks because it looks familiar; it's recognizable. People don't have to guess what kind of car it is. (Actually, if they put an air-cooled engine in the rear, I'd be all over it!) A new Camry would be like getting a different car brand. I might as well as be looking at Honda Civics, Chevy Cruzes, or who knows what else because the new Toyota Camry is simply not a Camry in my opinion.

If Nissan completely redesigned the new Leaf and only kept the name Leaf, then why should I have any nostalgic reason to buy a new Leaf? It wouldn't be a Leaf, just a whole new car that Nissan decided to name "Leaf". If the first Leaf has proven itself with me, then the next Leaf better be a lot like the first Leaf. Otherwise I'm not interested. I'll consider it, but I'll have to open my consideration to other EV's. If you keep it similar, then to me I'll be thinking, "Car A1 worked well. So I'll opt for car A2." But if you completely change it, then I'll be thinking, "Car A1 worked well. But there is no car A2. So I'll have to look at cars C, D and E. Car C is named "A2" but isn't at all like car A1."

It's like when Microsoft decided that a whole new redesign of Windows into Windows 8 was a good idea. No it wasn't! I've been using Microsoft since before Windows was their operating system back in the days of DOS. After Windows 3 Microsoft keep Windows pretty much the same up until Windows 8 when they completely changed how it looked. I was ready to consider an iMac at that point. And what did Microsoft end up doing? They ended up making Windows 10 look more like their original Windows line up.

 

[GetOffYourGas]

Who would buy this over the Bolt ?

If it's much less expensive to buy or lease than the Bolt, has 140 miles of range, QC standard, and the interior comfort of the current Leaf with another 25+HP and better working headlights, then I will. Cheerfully. I have no desire to drive a fast but crude little box with terrible seats.

As someone who is strongly considering Leaf 2, Bolt, and Model 3 (not to mention other rumored / teased future cars), the largest appeal of the Leaf is the "F". LEAF = Leading, Environmentally friendly, Affordable, Family car. I have two kids and am hoping for a third. The Bolt would be impossible to fit three car seats across the back, but my 2012 Leaf can do it. Assuming the 2018 Leaf is just as wide, this is a strong selling point for me or any other family.

Of course, as a driver, I strongly prefer the performance of the Bolt / Model 3. But having a family comes with all sorts of compromises.

 

[Nubo]

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

Do they have to be our direct descendants for us to care?

 

[webb14leafs]

Who would buy this over the Bolt ?

Seems a little odd to ask this question before the car is even released.

Also, I think the question has already been answered. Since the Bolt was released it has been outsold by the current generation of Leaf, so.......

I'm not criticizing the Bolt. It seems to be a great car, but I personally would not buy it because the $25K car with 100 mile range serves my needs perfectly. The extra range would be nice, but not $13K nice. I think a lot of people are making that sort of value based decision.

If the Leaf adds a 40kW battery AND keeps it's price around $25K, I predict it will continue to outsell the Bolt despite having less range, especially with current EV owners. Range anxiety goes away pretty quickly once you realize how rarely you drive more than 100 miles in a day, AND you realize that a 200 mile range still isn't enough for a long road trip since our charging infrastructure is still lacking.

I don't know if I'll ever own a Tesla, but I WOULD buy it over the Bolt simply because the Tesla Supercharger network is FAR superior to anything else.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

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.

You are right that 100 years is a very small slice of Earth time and that very fact is hampering our ability to recognize the true impact of our actions. The reality is Earth "cannot turn on a dime" so the magnitude of our actions is masked by the enormity of the scope we need to realize.

The one true failing of Science AKA as the concentration point of deniers, is failure to accurately predict the true consequences of our actions. It is true that we currently have little "evidence" (this greatly depends on each one's POV, not scientific fact) of climate change, etc. But the sad fact is by the time we do have the unimpeachable evidence, it will be far too late to do anything about it. There is no reverse here, only course corrections and like a pod in space, infinitesimally small changes now will result in a huge change in destination much farther down the road.

It is tasked to us to make the correct course adjustment now. The longer we wait, the greater (and more difficult, expensive, time consuming and painful) the correction must be.

So it is easy to take your position that we have no effect on the Planet, especially when that means we do not have to make changes. trump and others are banking on the natural Human resistance to change.

The reality is that misdirection is still winning and despite the multitudes of other benefits EVs provide, they still suffer from the influence of unimaginable wealth and power. Our biggest mistake is thinking all are created equally and are subject to the same laws we are.

 

[GetOffYourGas]

The one true failing of Science AKA as the concentration point of deniers, is failure to accurately predict the true consequences of our actions. It is true that we currently have little "evidence" (this greatly depends on each one's POV, not scientific fact) of climate change, etc. But the sad fact is by the time we do have the unimpeachable evidence, it will be far too late to do anything about it. There is no reverse here, only course corrections and like a pod in space, infinitesimally small changes now will result in a huge change in destination much farther down the road.

It is tasked to us to make the correct course adjustment now. The longer we wait, the greater (and more difficult, expensive, time consuming and painful) the correction must be.

Well put. The Earth's climate is a chaotic system. A tiny change in conditions can tip the scales and ripple into a HUGE difference down the road. In fact, the classic example of Chaos theory involves the Earth's weather system (different from Climate, I know, but still the same system). The almost insurmountable challenge of climate scientists is trying to predict the future of this chaotic system with only a relatively tiny knowledge of its past.

The butterfly effect describes how a small change in one state of a deterministic nonlinear system can result in large differences in a later state, e.g. a butterfly flapping its wings in Brazil can cause a tornado in Texas.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_theory

So it is easy to take your position that we have no effect on the Planet, especially when that means we do not have to make changes. trump and others are banking on the natural Human resistance to change.

The reality is that misdirection is still winning and despite the multitudes of other benefits EVs provide, they still suffer from the influence of unimaginable wealth and power. Our biggest mistake is thinking all are created equally and are subject to the same laws we are.

I agree with your sentiment but not with your wording. We are all created equal. The mistake is forgetting that we all fall short of our ideal state. Some of us try harder than others, but we all fall victim to temptations be it money, power, or self-righteous glory.

 

[jlv]

Can the climate change conversation move over to one of the threads dedicated to that? It's got nothing to do with the 2018 LEAF.

 

[jlv]

I don't know if I'll ever own a Tesla, but I WOULD buy it over the Bolt simply because the Tesla Supercharger network is FAR superior to anything else.

This has been my #1 reason for buying an S and (soon) a 3. When I need to go on a long distance trip (300+ miles), I don't know how I would do it in an EV without the SC network.

But there's still great value in a 150+/200+ mile EV just for those days when you do need to travel a huge amount "in town" on a single day. (For me, the other day I needed to go to Boston then to Worcester and then halfway back to Boston). You get home, plug-in, and (fully) recharge the car overnight. I personally don't think the SC network adds much value in this scenario, and I think this is the market the LEAF 2 can successfully capture.

 

[evnow]

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.

You are in a minority.

What we do need to do is to tie EVs with climate change. Most people don't get that.

 

[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.

You are in a minority.

What we do need to do is to tie EVs with climate change. Most people don't get that.

Polls said ly'n Hillary Clinton was going to win easily too. Trump 2020!

 

[webb14leafs]

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.

Thanks for being so respectful with your dissenting opinion. It's nice to see.

I want to make the point that there is much more to the environment than just CO2 emissions and global warming. Did you know that if you live within a mile of a freeway you are 5 times more likely to have Asthma, as well as a number of other respiratory and neurological disorders? Reducing/eliminating auto emissions has a big impact on our immediate well being.

Also, you have the right to be unconvinced about man's role in global warming. Just be aware that when a politician or CEO states that "the science isn't settled" on the issue, he/she is speaking for themself and not for the scientific community. The scientific community settled the science. It's the non-experts who are still settling whether or not they agree with the conclusion. You can find a dissenting meteorologist that has an unvetted theory, but there are no peer-reviewed studies that refute man's role in the current global warming trend.

 

[Dooglas]

Polls said ly'n Hillary Clinton was going to win easily too. Trump 2020!

Thanks for being so respectful with your dissenting opinion. It's nice to see.

Gee, webb, are you reading the same stuff the rest of us are in this thread? Doesn't look so nice, or respectful, or even appropriate to me.

 

[NavyCuda]

Polls said ly'n Hillary Clinton was going to win easily too. Trump 2020!

Thanks for being so respectful with your dissenting opinion. It's nice to see.

Gee, webb, are you reading the same stuff the rest of us are in this thread? Doesn't look so nice, or respectful, or even appropriate to me.

Perhaps you're too easily triggered?

 

[GRA]

(Fixed the quoting)

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. <snip>

Sure, but that assumes you care about the survival of other species when you don't care about your own, and that you believe that human actions are what's endangering them. That may apply to some people, but almost certainly not to Navy Cuda and people who have similar beliefs, so they need other reasons.