LEAF reliability survey, view results, sign up to help

[dhanson865]

...
To view the new graphs, select "reliability trends" in the breadcrumbs at the top of the linked page.

Please clarify.
The statement is incomprehensible.

there is a drop down menu where it says "More about the Nissan LEAF" with other graphs but I still can't figure out which one is the one he is talking about.

Michael please do give us a URL for the graph and/or a screen shot of the UI to get there from http://www.truedelta.com/Nissan-LEAF/reliability-968" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I've tried in Firefox and Chrome and don't see anything by the name "reliability trends".

 

[jlsoaz]

As for the nomenclature, it isn't always easy to find words that everyone will understand and that fully apply in every situation. For electric vehicles "engine" includes the entire power system, including the battery.

[...]

If you want your vehicle reliability tracking to be relevant and respected you need to use correct nomenclature.

To lump everything about fuel storage and the motor under engine makes your quality survey look incompetent and not worth looking at or participating in.

I agree they should get to fixing this nomenclature. The Leaf is far from the only vehicle on the market that has a traction battery, robust electric motor and other associated PEV equipment, and if an organization specializing in reliability information really wants to count itself as being nimble, reasonably cutting edge and so-on, then I think it would be best just to do this and stop putting it off. The Leaf has been out there four 4.5 years now. The True Delta folks have been forward-thinking enough to come into the forum and invite us to participate, and I like their page, and so there's no reason not to do this and make a small number of new fields in their database to handle certain types of parts that pertain only to certain new alt fuel vehicles, maybe not necessarily just PEVs but a small number of the other vehicles (Hydrogen, Natural Gas, etc.)

With respect to the reasoning they offer as to the battery issues:

[...]
The stats won't include many batteries because we usually only count successfully completed repairs, and in many cases owners are living with problems that Nissan hasn't entirely acknowledged. We do count unrepaired problems when a car is sold.

my view:

On the one hand, I think there is some merit to the idea of drawing the line where they have done.

On the other hand, I would suggest to the true delta folks that if we look at this issue, it starts to become clear that it helps show that their methodology may be in need of improvement when it comes to issues where there is such a clear or strong dispute between where the manufacturer and some of the users think the warranty definitions should be drawn. I think with 100+ year old gasoline vehicle technology, maybe these sorts of disputes are (in most cases) long-settled, but with new technology maybe they are not quite settled.

Perhaps another way to look at this is that if I was talking to a friend here in Arizona and they asked me for input on buying a used EV and issues to look for, I think the True Delta numbers would have limited value and would definitely not be the first thing we would discuss. The battery degradation topic would take awhile to cover. We might first look for example at the PIA survey numbers to help understand that they should be very careful about buying a used Leaf,

http://www.pluginamerica.org/surveys/batteries/leaf/vehicles.php?order=gid100" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

and maybe take a LeafDD or similar to the dealer to get a sense of exactly what they are getting. In the case of some other brand BEV and PHEV models, battery degradation might not be as much of an issue, ....I guess it depends.

Anyway, while the True Delta treatment of this may have some rationale, I think they should consider changing their approach, .... the present approach is in some cases for some purposes not capturing the single most important item.

They do say "We do count unrepaired problems when a car is sold.". I'm not quite sure what this means, and whether they would allow reduced range to be counted as an issue, and how. If so, then maybe it is not quite as urgent to review their methodolgy and might (perhaps) be a matter of waiting for the used vehicle data to mature?

 

[mkaresh]

New stuff this time. [...]

a few random thoughts:

Looking at this overall Nissan list:

http://www.truedelta.com/Nissan/brand-reliability-27" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

sometimes when I am looking at Nissan gasoline vehicles, I check out the Versa because it is decidedly inexpensive and some variants have a slight similarity to the Leaf in terms of style. I see that you do have some Versa data, but it is somewhat lacking for some years, so in any case, I will be curious how the Leaf stacks up compared to the Versa over time.

Also, looking at this overall competitive sort of graphic of all the manufacturers and their reliability:
http://www.truedelta.com/car-reliability-by-brand" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

- what's up with Tesla? Looks like off-the-charts bad reliability scores compared to every other brand??
- I wonder if, over time, BEVs prove to be relatively reliable, we would be able to look at your data and conclude that such vehicles help a manufacturer's score overall. It might make for an interesting story if some manufacturers start to see BEVs both as a way to meet CAFE and as a way to improve their reliability reputation. It's also just a general long-standing issue I think.... to be able to quantify and back up the idea that BEVs are more reliable and less expensive to maintain in both time and dollars.

Tesla's issue don't reflect on BEVs in general. They most likely reflect the fact that Tesla is an all-new company producing an all-new car.

 

[mkaresh]

As for the nomenclature, it isn't always easy to find words that everyone will understand and that fully apply in every situation. For electric vehicles "engine" includes the entire power system, including the battery.

The stats won't include many batteries because we usually only count successfully completed repairs, and in many cases owners are living with problems that Nissan hasn't entirely acknowledged. We do count unrepaired problems when a car is sold.

If you want your vehicle reliability tracking to be relevant and respected you need to use correct nomenclature.

To lump everything about fuel storage and the motor under engine makes your quality survey look incompetent and not worth looking at or participating in.

There are only two "TrueDelta folks," my wife and I. Our time is limited. We cannot do everything we'd like to do, and must prioritize.

This item is not a high priority for us because it has very little effect on anything except that some people apparently see us as incompetent as a result.

We provide actual repair frequencies, not just stats, four times a year. We provide repair odds as well as averages. We post every reported repair description. We now provide trend graphs. All of it for free to everyone who helps provide the date. No one else, including some far larger organizations, does any of this.

Sorry it's still not enough.

As is, he battery issues get reported and posted to the site even with "engine" as the closest system option.

 

[mkaresh]

Hi - this looks to me like good news - are the 2013 Leaf numbers (somewhat) improved since more owners have reported in? Why is there no line-item for the 2014 numbers? I was comparing a bit to the Versa and Versa Note gasoline vehicles, just to get an idea, and it does look like there are 2014 line-items for those vehicles, even if there are not many reports yet. Or, maybe there is a reluctance to provide 2014 numbers on the Leaf until a certain threshold is reached?

The 2014s won't be included in the survey until enough owners sign up.

On batteries that have degraded but that haven't been repaired, if these are reported they can be posted to the site, they just won't count towards the stats.

 

[mkaresh]

I'd upload an image of the reliability trends but unlike other forums this one doesn't appear to enable this. Clearly they're incompetent (no, I don't really mean this).

Breadcrumbs are the things near the top of the page that look like this:

Repair Frequencies >> Nissan >> LEAF

Direct link:

http://www.truedelta.com/2014-Nissan-LEAF/reliability-trends-968" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sorry for being more than a bit off-kilter today, I didn't get to sleep until 8 AM this morning.

 

[dhanson865]

Breadcrumbs are the things near the top of the page that look like this:

Repair Frequencies >> Nissan >> LEAF

Direct link:

http://www.truedelta.com/2014-Nissan-LEAF/reliability-trends-968" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sorry for being more than a bit off-kilter today, I didn't get to sleep until 8 AM this morning.

Thanks finally got there.

http://www.truedelta.com/2014-Toyota-Prius/reliability-trends-272" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; is another one.

 

[mkaresh]

Updated stats soon. Once again we'll have a healthy number of responses for the 2011, 2012, and 2013. The 2014 still isn't in the survey--but if five more owners join it will be added. The 2015 is in the survey, but as I'm typing this is three responses short of a decent sample size.

In other words, while more 2011s, 2012s, and 2013s would also be helpful, a few more 2014s and 2015s would be very helpful.

To join, if you haven't already:

http://www.truedelta.com/join" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[jlsoaz]

- what's up with Tesla? Looks like off-the-charts bad reliability scores compared to every other brand?? [...]

Tesla's issue don't reflect on BEVs in general. They most likely reflect the fact that Tesla is an all-new company producing an all-new car.

Hi, just browsing around, and mulling it over. I like Tesla overall, and doubt their reliability is "that" bad, but if at some point you have enough data points in this area, and want to bring some attention to your service, it might be an idea to do things like present user data on Tesla versus other BEVs or Tesla versus other ICVs. Example:

2013 Tesla Model S vs. 2013 Leaf reliability trend:
http://www.truedelta.com/reliability_trends.php?my=2013&brand_2=Tesla&mc_2=1095&mc_1=968&pvw=0&brand_1=27" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

2013 Tesla Model S vs. 2013 BMW 5-series reliability trend:
http://www.truedelta.com/2013-Tesla-Model-S/reliability-trends-preview-1095/vs-5-Series-20" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[mkaresh]

Unfortunately, the Model S continues to require repairs much more often than the typical car. It looked like the 2015 would be much better, but it's not.

Our reliability stats for the LEAF now cover the year ending June 30, 2015. (Others are over a year behind, and so report how these cars were doing when a year younger.)

Repair trips per 100 cars:

2015 LEAF: 6, low
2013 LEAF: 22, low
2012 LEAF: 32, low
2011 LEAF: 17, low

We have two additional statistics, "Nada-odds" and "Lemon-odds", to indicate the percentage of cars with no repairs in the past year and those that required 3+ trips to the repair shop:

2013 LEAF: 79, < 1
2012 LEAF: 72, < 1
2011 LEAF: 80, < 1

Additional participants are always helpful.

For the descriptions of all reported repairs, results for other models, and to sign up to help improve this information:

Nissan LEAF reliability ratings and comparisons

 

[jlsoaz]

...
Nissan LEAF reliability ratings and comparisons

thanks for posting the updated information.

 

[mkaresh]

You're certainly welcome. I'm very grateful that so many LEAF owners have been helping.

We've updated our reliability stats for the LEAF to include owner experiences through September 30, 2015.

Repair frequencies, in terms of repair trips per 100 cars per year:

2015 LEAF: 9, low
2013 LEAF: 24, low
2012 LEAF: 22, low
2011 LEAF: 19, low

We have two additional statistics, "Nada-odds" and "Lemon-odds", to indicate the percentage of cars with no repairs in the past year and those that required 3+ trips to the repair shop:

2013 LEAF: 75, < 1
2012 LEAF: 85, < 1
2011 LEAF: 84, < 1

We'll have further updates in February and in May. Additional participants are needed to provide precise stats for all model years.

For the details, including repair descriptions, and to sign up to help improve this information:

Nissan LEAF reliability ratings and comparisons

 

[mkaresh]

We've updated our reliability stats for the LEAF to include owner experiences through June 30, 2016. Reliability information elsewhere is based on a survey conducted in April 2015--well over a year ago.

Repair frequencies, in terms of repair trips per 100 cars per year (lower is better):

2015 LEAF: 10, low
2014 LEAF: 0, low, very small sample size--more of these would be especially helpful
2013 LEAF: 14, low
2012 LEAF: 17, low
2011 LEAF: 27, low

We have two additional statistics, "Nada-odds" and "Lemon-odds", to indicate the percentage of cars with no repairs in the past year and those that required 3+ trips to the repair shop:

2015 LEAF: 90, < 1
2013 LEAF: 90, < 1
2012 LEAF: 79, < 1
2011 LEAF: 77, < 1

We'll have further updates in November and next February. The more owners participate, the more comprehensive and precise these will be.

For the repairs behind these stats, reliability information on other models, and to sign up to help improve this information:

Nissan LEAF reliability ratings and comparisons