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

[TomT]

They have been around quite a long time and are actually well known...

Hadn't heard of Autobytel before this, how reliable are they?

 

[TomT]

I drove much the same way when I had my 2011 Leaf for five years. And I never want to have to do it again! I drive my Gen 2 Volt pretty much like a "regular" car and am amazed at how much better its efficiency is: at 70, about what I got on the Leaf at 60...

While that is definitely true for my driving style with the LEAF (right lane, 60-65MPH while everyone else is doing 75-80MPH), that is definitely not how I drive the Tesla. Instead, I'm in the left line driving the same speed as all the other traffic (75-80MPH). I don't drive differently at all.

 

[lorenfb]

Tesla did/is doing it by being cool. Surprisingly none of the other manufacturers have figured this out; you'd think with their marketing prowess it would be easy.

What, it's all about "cool", a new marketing lexicon? Again naivete abounds. And what of any real significance
has Tesla really done? Is this what "cool" means?:

1. Has continued to lose money on each vehicle sold.
2. Scammed potential buyers to loan it close to 1/2 billion dollars, based on an imaginary $35K BEV with
implied standard features found in the Model S.
3. Failed to convince Panasonic of its long term viability, affecting Panasonic's willingness to fulfill its $2B
commitment to Giga.
4. Has no key technological ecosystem protecting the market share it may achieve in the future.
5. Recently lowered the Model X price to increase declining demand.
6. Has essentially indicated that it really couldn't care less about selling a high volume $35K BEV.
7. Continually fails to meet its corporate sales guidance.
8. Has battery production problems even at it comparatively small vehicle production volume.
9. Other than for battery production, Tesla is not as highly vertically integrated as most automotive OEMs.
Thus is highly reliant on its key suppliers.
10. With the Model X target ASP of $45K - $50K, Tesla will begin to cannibalize the sales of the Model S,
thus further reducing its long term viability.

Real "cool", to the naive!

1. Profits on every car sold, and invests all profits (and more) in R&D and infrastructure
2. Hogwash
3. Evidence ?
4. SC network, for a start. Motor and battery IP, for a few others. Gigafactory for another.
5. Spin
6. Spin
7. FUD
8. FUD. Gigafactory on track or ahead of guidance
9. Spin. Show me another manufacturer with a Gigafactory and motor production in-house. AESC up for sale does not count
10. FUD. Decide whether high volume production is good or bad; you cannot have it both ways.

1. Read their P&L statement lately & understand the difference between gross profit & a GAAP profit?
A company at some point must make a positive GAAP or Chapter 7 results. Remember, G&A (overhead),
sales cost, and R&D need to be paid.
2. Elon has stated the majority of E deliveries will be at $45K to $50K. Hopefully, you were not among those scammed. You seem to be one who fully researches a potential buying decision, e.g. your used Leaf.
3. Again, read Tesla's balance sheet, i.e. Panasonic has only provided about 10% of their original commitment.
4. And what key technology does Tesla have that other OEMs don't have? And by the way, Google leads Tesla
in AI autonomous driving! Furthermore, Tesla failed to integrate radar technology in Gen 1 and relied too
heavily in the MobilEye collision avoidance technology and their marginal processor.
5. Why lower the X price other than to increase demand, or is this Elon's benevolence to the BEV market?
6. So what's the implication of Elon's statement that the ASP of the Model 3 will be between $45K to $50K?
7. Have you reviewed the last few years, e.g. 2016 guidance of 80K but the actual was 76K?
8. "On Schedule", to Elon's latest revision. Seen those Model 3s being shipped from Nevada lately?
9. Giga is only a battery assembly facility and a final assembly for the Model 3. Producing a simple induction
motor in-house hardly qualifies as being highly vertically integrated!
10. High volume at a loss, i.e. a $35K Model 3, will result in greater losses for Tesla and finally result in Chapter 7.

 

[DNAinaGoodWay]

Well, if it's just a case of leaking for publicity, it worked for me.

They have been around quite a long time and are actually well known...

Hadn't heard of Autobytel before this, how reliable are they?

 

[SageBrush]

... snipped ...

Elon has said that the expected ASP of the Model 3 is ~ $42k and 20% gross margins are expected from 2018.
Time will tell if he is right. No doubt it is a heavy bet for the company.

Everything else is your spin, so enjoy it. I guess.

 

[edatoakrun]

Off-topic :

...Elon has said that the expected ASP of the Model 3 is ~ $42k...

That story changed yesterday:

....To sell the paper, Elon is upping his revenue prognostications using both higher production numbers, and higher model 3 prices:

Tesla Model 3 annual demand could surpass 700,000 units, says Elon Musk

...Goldman Sachs hosted a meeting with Tesla CFO Deepak Ahuja for bondholders to discuss the opportunity that the new bonds offer and Musk joined in on the phone to answer a few questions.

Two sources at the event told Electrek that Musk updated his projection to “700,000 units per year” and he added that he could see it eventually go even higher.

In comparison, BMW 3 Series and Audi A4, two vehicles against which Tesla hopes to compete with the Model 3 in the mid-luxury sedan segment, have annual production rates of about 400,000 and 330,000 cars per year respectively....

Furthermore, the CEO also updated his expectations for the average sale price of the vehicle.

Musk previously said that he expects the Model 3, which starts at $35,000, to have an average sale price of $42,000.

Today, he said that the average sale price should be closer to $45,000 once the vehicle is at full production. At first, Musk said the average price should be closer to $50,000 as Tesla limits the options to the long range battery pack and premium interior, which results in all Model 3 vehicles being delivered today costing at least $49,000.

... the new figures have a great impact on the overall estimated financial value of the Model 3 program, which was previously estimated as having a potential of about $20 billion in revenue per year.

Now Musk’s new projections put the overall annual revenue of the Model 3 program to over $30 billion per year....

https://electrek.co/2017/08/07/tesla-model-3-annual-demand-elon-musk/

TSLA corporate outlook

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=20321&start=510

 

[SageBrush]

I'm not sure what 'full production' means or when it will happen. One interp could be in 2019 when Tesla reaches 10k a week production. I'm more inclined to to think he is referencing AWD and the P versions, but that is just a guess. And in any case people can buy whatever they want, from $35k onward and we know know what the lower priced versions include so we don't have to guess about people being priced out of a purchase based on future undisclosed pricing. If they are still in the game now, they will stay.

700k Model 3 a year sounds pretty good to me, although part of me thinks the truly eye popping volumes, at least in the US, will occur with the CUV Model Y. I bet Elon is already eyeing a second car plant in addition to another battery factory. The man thinks big, and is full steam ahead.

 

[LeftieBiker]

Jesus, argue about this in another topic - a Tesla topic! I expect to find new Leaf 2 info, and instead I get squabbling about Tesla production. Feh...

 

[jdcbomb]

Um back to the topic of the Leaf...

Nissan did this for the Rogue, wherein they offered the previous gen as the "select" one for a lower price. Possibility this would happen for the Leaf?

 

[LeftieBiker]

I think it's less likely, because the "new" Leaf consists largely of the old. There would be little savings from not retooling, because they only have to do limited retooling as it is. If they built the S at another plant, that might make sense. But with all of them built at Smyrna here, it doesn't.

 

[DNAinaGoodWay]

So, this source claims the leak was from a US dealer. I checked with a couple sales reps and neither will admit access to a configurator.

 

[geefish]

I think it's less likely, because the "new" Leaf consists largely of the old. There would be little savings from not retooling, because they only have to do limited retooling as it is. If they built the S at another plant, that might make sense. But with all of them built at Smyrna here, it doesn't.

Assuming that the next gen Leaf is actually largely based upon the old and reusing a lot of the current Leaf in its design/build. I'm yet to be convinced it is.

The VW Golf looks almost identical from one generation to the next in some instances but simple research shows that its a complete new platform with less then 5% carryover etc.

Time will tell...
Less then 4 weeks to official reveal.

 

[GRA]

GRA, your points are well taken, but only the most die-hard EV enthusiast would even consider the effort and planning required to make a trip like you describe (queue the die-hards to sing "I do that every day"! )

What planning? The whole point is that no planning is required, if you've got enough range and lots of charging infrastructure in the right places (as is the case with Bay Area to Mammoth via 120/395 and a big battery Tesla). Just get in and go, stop if needed in Manteca or more likely Groveland for a charge. This is an easy weekend round trip in an ICE, only slightly less convenient and flexible (because you have to stop in particular places to charge, which also controls where you eat (and maybe sleep) in a long range Tesla or any other BEV with similar range and charging infrastructure, although no other company currently has that combination. As a car's range decreases and its recharging times lengthen, the inconvenience/time suck increases to the point that it isn't worth it for most people. But I consider a single en-route QC that takes about the same time as a meal to be a minor and acceptable inconvenience for most weekend trips, as many people would be stopping to eat in any case. Beyond that, BEVs don't make sense for the average person, but most people take far more weekend trips than they do week-plus road-warrior ones, so they may well be willing to rent for the latter.

But all in all, you reinforce the notion that long-range EV travel is not even close to being ready for the mainstream, at least not yet. Someday it will be, but certainly not today. The good news is that the 95th percentile short and mid-range use cases for an EV are getting pretty stable, and that will drive wider adoption which in turn will drive the need for universal infrastructure.

Give it a couple of more years, and these edge cases that seem to be the rage as absolute imperatives will also be a no-brainer. If you want a goal, then make it 80/350/20. When mainstream EVs can do that, then we can celebrate, but not until then.

We have no disagreement that long-range (more than one enroute QC each way) BEV travel isn't mainstream yet. I've said as much for years. The personal standard I've long expressed as what's needed for the mainstream to consider BEVs as full replacements for ICEs is essentially identical to yours: at least 4 hours at the freeway speed limit +5 mph (<= 80 mph) + at least a 30 mile reserve, in all conditions in which you can safely do that with free use of the HVAC, being able to recharge that during a fast food stop and do it again for as many hours as you want to drive that day, with charging infrastructure spaced no more than 1/2 hour apart and at all major junctions, and do so with the original battery for at least 15 and preferably 20+ years. Nobody can do this now; only Tesla is even approaching 50% of that capability at the moment. Hopefully Electrify America will start to approach that level of infrastructure within a few years, and we'll also be seeing more (high-end) long-range BEVs in the next couple of years. In the meantime, PHEVs will be the mainstream PEV that provides a complete ICE replacement.

 

[LeftieBiker]

Assuming that the next gen Leaf is actually largely based upon the old and reusing a lot of the current Leaf in its design/build. I'm yet to be convinced it is.

We can see the midsection in the spy shots, and it's the same, possibly excepting the roofline. Other spy and PR shot show parts of the interior: with the exception of the dash they are mostly the same. Why would Nissan redesign the Leaf to just look as if they were face-lifting it...? The motor may be all new, or just an enhancement of the existing one, but economic as well as regular logic are saying that this is actually Leaf 1.99.

 

[edatoakrun]

For those who missed it, much of the suspect Autobytel leaked data is still available at a gallery below:

2018 Nissan Leaf pricing, power leaked online — undercuts Bolt, Tesla

Update: As expected, Autobytel has pulled the leaked data from its site. We figured this would happen, so we took screenshots and posted them above. Enjoy.

Despite Nissan's efforts to keep a lid on the 2018 Leaf, leaks and spy shots continue to trickle out. In what might be the biggest breach yet, Autobytel posted a full spec sheet along with pricing for the upcoming EV. While Nissan won't confirm anything here, we have reason to believe that this is generally accurate, though we'll have to wait for the full reveal next month to be sure. The Leaf's range hasn't been announced, but we do have horsepower and torque ratings. The $29,990 base price will undercut the Chevy Bolt EV and Tesla Model 3 by about $5,000, a huge win for Nissan...

https://www.autoblog.com/2017/08/08/price-power-nissan-leaf-2018-leaked-online-undercuts-bolt-tesla/#slide-6840087

 

[jdcbomb]

What would be "stopping" this Leaf from having a battery as large as 60 kWh? In other words what factors would prevent Nissan from offering a capacity and range at least as good as the Bolt or entry level Model 3?

Factors:
Design Limitation? As designed (probably more than a year ago) it cannot physically fit more cells to increase overall capacity.

Battery Sourcing? They are unable to source a larger battery as they are competing against an ever increasing list of car companies (Audi, VW, BMW, etc.)

Profit Margin? Even they could get a battery this large, the maximum selling price is around $37K-$38K to keep it "affordable" and offering 60 kWh would either throw the price out of range or cause them to sell at a loss (like the Bolt).

Timing? Nissan was caught off guard when the Bolt and it's range was revealed last year...and already had specs locked in and planned by then.

I would think that Nissan held off on revealing the Leaf 2.0 to possibly redesign the battery whether in a minor or major way...

 

[Firetruck41]

Every body panel looks different (front, rear, hood, tailgate, front and rear quarters, rear doors, only one I'm not sure of is the front doors. If it is using the "old leaf" they have retooled the exterior body panels almost completely.

 

[edatoakrun]

...what factors would prevent Nissan from offering a capacity and range at least as good as the Bolt or entry level Model 3?...

Could be Nissan's objective to sell large numbers of BEVs profitably worldwide, and sanity...

 

[geefish]

Every body panel looks different (front, rear, hood, tailgate, front and rear quarters, rear doors, only one I'm not sure of is the front doors. If it is using the "old leaf" they have retooled the exterior body panels almost completely.

My opinion on if its a complete redesign and a new platform come only from two statements made by Nissan executives.
Firstly about 6 weeks ago when the first teaser was officially released, the head of Nissan Norway announced the reveal date and stated it was a complete redesign in an interview with Norwegian media.

The second statement came from Carlos Ghosn at a shareholders meeting in Japan I think it was about April last year, or it may have been the year before. He clearly stated that the next Leaf would be a new platform to enable increased strengthening and rigidity whilst lowering the weight and thus improving electric range efficiency.
A redesign platform may also be needed to relocate the battery or accommodate a larger or different shaped battery - but this is just my opinion and I have not heard anything or read any media along these lines

Like you Firetruck41, I think every panel and even the door shape just doesn't quite look the same to my eye. Although I am quite happy to admit I am wrong with the fullness of time.

27 days and counting...

 

[ydnas7]

What would be "stopping" this Leaf from having a battery as large as 60 kWh? In other words what factors would prevent Nissan from offering a capacity and range at least as good as the Bolt or entry level Model 3?......

Nissan's battery development

initial 24 kWh (heat sensitive)
improved electrolytes 24kWh (lizard, but multiple little changes)
prior (improved electrolyte) and new NMC cathode 30kWh
(2018) prior (improved electrolyte, NMC cathode)and new anode 40ish kWh
future? prior (improved electrolyte, NMC cathode, next anode) but new dimensions and packaging - 60kWh

the 60kWh pack is well photographed and disclosed, it fits the same cutout (footprint) as the existing packs, but is thicker and its lumps (profile) are different. It won't fit the same floor. At minimum the seats will be differently located, (new floor panel, new seats, etc etc etc)

I don't know what Nissan is doing, but 2018 40kWh LEAF is a sensible car built to a price. New motor, better aero, more battery, some pilot stuff, same price.

Is Nissan 60kWh going into a LEAF, its possible, but it would require major effort. Its lower risk/higher cost for Nissan to make this a 2 step process.

60 kWh will be coming to a Nissan SUV and sedan, what and when ? who know

2nd half of 2018, I expect Nissan LEAF to outsell Tesla 3 on a global basis. why. forced sales in China (which don't affect Tesla)