Official Kia Soul EV thread

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
One thing I've noted is that the Soul (IC version 2014) has somewhat better crash test ratings than the current Leaf:
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/v/class-summary/small-cars" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I would assume that the EV would score similar results.?
 
ILETRIC said:
It just might give Nissan run for its money. Same price, more miles...

I'm actually debating for the first time to look at it and if we like what we see, and the 93-mile range appears solid, chuck our 2011 Leaf and lease this thing until Model III comes out.

The above is also contingent upon the lease terms for 15,000 miles b/c 12,000 ain't gonna cut it for us.

same price?? well that would be news
 
Comparably equipped, they are about the same price... Kia doesn't make a stripper like Nissan does (the S) and Kia's feature content is higher than the Leafs, including features that even the SL does not have as stock...

DaveinOlyWA said:
same price?? well that would be news
 
morlglums said:
One thing I've noted is that the Soul (IC version 2014) has somewhat better crash test ratings than the current Leaf:
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/v/class-summary/small-cars" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I would assume that the EV would score similar results.?

Really? Given that an ICE has more mass in the front to absorb the crash energy.

Have a lot guessing in this thread don't we?
 
In modern cars, the engine is not part of the crash absorption systems and is often considered a detriment rather than an advantage as its incursion in to the passenger compartment must be controlled...

lorenfb said:
Really? Given that an ICE has more mass in the front to absorb the crash energy.
 
lorenfb said:
Have a lot guessing in this thread don't we?
Just from you, sweetums :roll: "Mass" is not what absorbs collision energy. A big, solid chunk of metal will not absorb anything.

So what's gotten that stick up your butt over the Soul EV? Once upon a time people on this forum were happy for news of other EVs, because more competition drives innovation and lowers price and wider adoption is kind of the end goal.
=Smidge=
 
Smidge204 said:
lorenfb said:
Have a lot guessing in this thread don't we?
Just from you, sweetums :roll: "Mass" is not what absorbs collision energy. A big, solid chunk of metal will not absorb anything.

So what's gotten that stick up your butt over the Soul EV? Once upon a time people on this forum were happy for news of other EVs, because more competition drives innovation and lowers price and wider adoption is kind of the end goal.
=Smidge=

Seconded.

I must say it's awfully refreshing to see a car company building 5,000 EVs for outright sale to customers being debated as fringe or compliance. Coming from the EV1 days I never thought I'd see the day.
 
TomT said:
In modern cars, the engine is not part of the crash absorption systems and is often considered a detriment rather than an advantage as its incursion in to the passenger compartment must be controlled...

lorenfb said:
Really? Given that an ICE has more mass in the front to absorb the crash energy.

+1. the engine is generally designed to break away and travel a path that takes it under the passenger area. better this than a hot manifold in your lap
 
TomT said:
Comparably equipped, they are about the same price... Kia doesn't make a stripper like Nissan does (the S) and Kia's feature content is higher than the Leafs, including features that even the SL does not have as stock...

DaveinOlyWA said:
same price?? well that would be news

I guess for "some" values for options provided is important. for others like me, I'd rather have the option to pay less and forego stuff I don't want to pay for.

Back when the S was introduced most car "experts" thought they would comprise less than 5 % of sales. so what is the percentage of S's over the other trim options?
 
lorenfb said:
morlglums said:
One thing I've noted is that the Soul (IC version 2014) has somewhat better crash test ratings than the current Leaf:
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/v/class-summary/small-cars" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I would assume that the EV would score similar results.?

Really? Given that an ICE has more mass in the front to absorb the crash energy.

Have a lot guessing in this thread don't we?


Force = Mass * Acceleration

If you hit a wall/bridge then your acceleration will be pretty much constant from the speed you were going to 0 so if you are in a heaveir car if you remove Mass there will be less force. The big difference in this ICE to EV case isn't a difference in mass but where it's placed.

What you are probably refering to is the "big old american car" way of thinking about safety. If I have a big heavy car and hit a smaller car then the energy of the impact (force) is set already by the speeds and the cars involved. If 1 car has more mass than another then that cars accelration will be less. Example my truck will plow through that compact. So it's my safety at the cost of someone elses. Of coarse this backfires when you talk about hitting objects that won't move, just look at the F150 crash results vs smart car.

If you want safety if we all drive the lighest cars possible without compromising on current safety standards everything would be much much better regardless of hitting another car or a bridge support.
 
Each to their own obviously but if the S had been the only model available when I ordered my SL-e, I would have walked way... I like and desire the extra features...

DaveinOlyWA said:
Back when the S was introduced most car "experts" thought they would comprise less than 5 % of sales. so what is the percentage of S's over the other trim options?
 
Kia called me today (I am in their mailing list, and had many kias prior to my leaf). They told me the soul ev will be available in IL in late 2015.

They and nissan (for leaf gen 2) should start a deposit based preorder like tesla.
 
DougWantsALeaf said:
They and nissan (for leaf gen 2) should start a deposit based preorder like tesla.
I don't think Nissan will start a list - that would be one way to reduce current Gen leaf sales. Even Tesla won't start a list too soon...
 
minispeed said:
lorenfb said:
morlglums said:
One thing I've noted is that the Soul (IC version 2014) has somewhat better crash test ratings than the current Leaf:
http://www.iihs.org/iihs/ratings/v/class-summary/small-cars" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I would assume that the EV would score similar results.?

Really? Given that an ICE has more mass in the front to absorb the crash energy.

Have a lot guessing in this thread don't we?


Force = Mass * Acceleration

If you hit a wall/bridge then your acceleration will be pretty much constant from the speed you were going to 0 so if you are in a heaveir car if you remove Mass there will be less force. The big difference in this ICE to EV case isn't a difference in mass but where it's placed.

What you are probably refering to is the "big old american car" way of thinking about safety. If I have a big heavy car and hit a smaller car then the energy of the impact (force) is set already by the speeds and the cars involved. If 1 car has more mass than another then that cars accelration will be less. Example my truck will plow through that compact. So it's my safety at the cost of someone elses. Of coarse this backfires when you talk about hitting objects that won't move, just look at the F150 crash results vs smart car.

If you want safety if we all drive the lighest cars possible without compromising on current safety standards everything would be much much better regardless of hitting another car or a bridge support.

Yes, you got the point being made, i.e. an ICE in the engine compartment will provide more protection
than a small BEV's motor and its electronics.
 
lorenfb said:
Yes, you got the point being made, i.e. an ICE in the engine compartment will provide more protection
than a small BEV's motor and its electronics.

If you think I "got the point" you made then you are missing my point. No matter how you spin it a heavy engine block that won't deform much is not adding safety.

If you have the room for an ICE but you instead can have a larger crumple zone that will be safer.
 
In addition, many of the injuries associated within the cabin front a frontal crash are the results of engine components coming into the cabin area (especially the foot well). Reducing the amount of parts in the front helps reduce those pieces making it into the cabin.
 
Back
Top