Why 200 miles??

[hill]

What is wrong with a ev that goes 150 miles. That is a game changer. It doesnt have to be 200 miles....... snip...... .

simple - because if nissan says 200 miles in actuality it will be 150 miles. Think about it. They told us 100 miles on our RevI - and it was actually about 80 miles for most - and even less range, after the battery started to lose capacity. And of course then there's cold weather and hilly environments. So congratulations - you will be getting a hundred fifty mile range - so you're good to go

 

[knightmb]

Personally I think 200 miles is still too low. I think they need to be shooting closer to 300 miles to match an ICE counterpart. Why? Road trips. When I buy a car, I want to be able to jump in it and go wherever I want like I do an ICE car including long distance road trips. 200 miles "what nissan would call 200 miles is probably more like 150 on a good day" is still too low. That's just my opinion and I would always spend the extra money for the larger battery.

If you have the battery capacity to go 300 miles, how long would it take to "quick charge" it at the current stations we have? It takes over 30 minutes to QC a 24 kW/h Leaf from dead to full, so then you would be looking at sitting at a QC station for probably 2 hours to charge up a 80 kW/h Leaf from depleted to full again. I know the Tesla can charge at a much higher power than the Leaf, but do all the current QC stations support this kind of long time charging or would all of them need yet another upgrade (or Tesla makes an amazing adapter for Leaf users to start using their stations)?

 

[DanCar]

If you have the battery capacity to go 300 miles, how long would it take to "quick charge" it at the current stations we have?

Quick charging is a relatively simple problem compared to range. Just connect the batteries in parallel supply a lot of juice and you got that 300 mile range battery charged in 15 minutes. Expensive but doable.

 

[kaikara]

For those living in cold climates the larger batteries are necessary to get reliable distance while using heat. While I am sold on EVs I really believe 200 miles is necessary for me so I can purchase the car and use it long term. 200 miles will give me the buffer I need where battery degradation will not be a huge issue until a number of years out and will make an EV a comfortable daily driver from December through February. This isn't necessary for people in all climates so it would be nice if the next gen leaf would have two battery sizes so if you wanted it you could pay for the larger size.

 

[mbender]

If you have the battery capacity to go 300 miles, how long would it take to "quick charge" it at the current stations we have?

Quick charging is a relatively simple problem compared to range. Just connect the batteries in parallel supply a lot of juice and you got that 300 mile range battery charged in 15 minutes. Expensive but doable.

Plus, one of the main benefits of 2-300 mile range is that the need to quick charge is greatly reduced. I quick charge relatively frequently, but might not have to at all with 2-300 mile range. If I did, it would be on a long trip, and I wouldn't mind waiting 45 minutes or so for another 2-3 hours of driving.

( 45 minutes even at the current 50kW would add ~35kWh... * 4.0 m/kWh = 140 miles.
Bump Chademo up to even a mere 75kW and you could add 200+ miles in 45 minutes. )

 

[nosuchthing]

Nissan sold us a 100-mile car goes 75 miles. GM will have a 200-mile car that goes 150.

Ain't that the truth!

 

[smkettner]

If you have the battery capacity to go 300 miles, how long would it take to "quick charge" it at the current stations we have? It takes over 30 minutes to QC a 24 kW/h Leaf from dead to full, so then you would be looking at sitting at a QC station for probably 2 hours to charge up a 80 kW/h Leaf from depleted to full again.

Miles gained per minute would only improve as with a larger battery the tapering off will start at far more miles and capacity level. Also battery heat will be reduced because in effect you are charging slower relative to capacity.

 

[keydiver]

But isn't this the same thing as cars being offered with different engine option?

No, that's not really apples-to-apples. Most car manufactures use the same engines in multiple cars in their line, to defray costs. The 4-cylinder they offer in the minivan is probably the same one they use in a compact car, etc. I'm sure that you can find each of those Jetta engine options in another vehicle.

 

[BrockWI]

But then it still amazes me how many go with the LEAF S with no heat pump heater. I would never do that.
Hard to predict what human beings will do.

Hey are you making fun of me for my bad choice before I knew what heater was in each car? kidding

To be fair I don't run the heat until it's around 0F outside and then the heat pump wouldn't help me anyway. But my wife or when I have the kids with me, the heat pump would help a bunch in that spring and fall times around here

 

[adric22]

I also agree there is no point in a 200 mile range, except for a high-end product.

The thing I keep saying is that 80 miles is really enough for most people. 120 miles would definitely be enough for any city car. The trouble is, when you go over 120 miles you are really looking to make the car a "road trip" car and at this stage of the game even 400 miles is really not enough to be a road trip car. Not until the charging infrastructure grows a LOT more, especially the DC fast charge infrastructure.

So if you plan on doing road trips then a PHEV is still the best way to go. For example, I'd actually prefer a BMW i3 Rex over a Tesla Model-S for taking a road trip. Despite the i3's tiny engine and gas tank, I would still prefer it over the Tesla. There are gas stations everywhere. Superchargers? Well, good luck with that. Obviously something like a Volt is more ideal.

 

[Valdemar]

I also agree there is no point in a 200 mile range, except for a high-end product.

Considering 20-30% capacity loss after 3-4 years is not something unheard of 200 mile range IMO is right on target for anyone who is not addicted to the 2-3 year car leasing cycle.

 

[johnrhansen]

It seems to me a waste of money and rresources to dump huge dollars into a investment that wears out simply by sitting there. If you aren't using the high range capabilities every day, then why toss an extra 10 grand into your car for something that does nothing but add weight to your car for 95 percent of the time. The leaf's range right now is perfect. All they need to do is sell an optional detachable 20 hp range extender engine tank combo that drives one or both of the rear wheels at highway speeds. Be a lot cheaper and lighter than adding all those batteries. And it would help to heat the cabin.

 

[Yogi62]

For a mostly intra-city driver:

Given that your driving pattern doesn't drastically change, the degradation due to battery cycling is reduced when you double the battery size. Daily cycles of 40% of the battery capacity should be less stressful than 80% of the battery capacity. It also gives you more "extra long driving days" options.

The tradeoff is that you are carrying more weight around when you are not using that extra capacity.

For a driver with some inter-city ambitions:

You need access to a charging (supercharging?) network that is sufficiently built out that you can always find a charging station when you are between 20% and 40% charged, and then get back to 90% in a reasonable amount of time. 70 mile range doesn't cut it. 150 (actual) might. 2.5 hours of driving and 30 minutes of charging gets you there at about 50 mph average.

So an advertized range of 200 at less than luxury sedan price would be a great step forward, and possibly a commercial success given progress in the charging network.

Will it come for Nissan? GM? Tesla? Ford? Time will tell.

 

[minispeed]

There's easy more than just the physics and personal needs of drivers. A lot of it is psychological marketing.

Just like we all know there's no difference to us when we need something at the store and see 2 competing products that fit our needs, 1 at $199 and 1 at $201. The smart buyer will always pick the one that is best, a lot of us here that choose to learn about EVs and post on an ev forum will look beyond the number. However for the mass market it matters, the $199 product will sell more and be more appealing than the $201. 150 to 200 might only be 50 but the first impression is that they are of by 100.

To build on that all the talk was at least 150 for a second gen BEV. GM was first or of the gate with the bolt at 200. We've seen the infinity but its off the table now and I don't think they ever said range or price.

Anyone else who wants to look good on the press has to have at least 200 now. They may release lower range versions after but if they come out of the gate with less than 200 all the press reviews will say it's not enough.

Ps sorry about typos. Touch screen is acting up

 

[TonyWilliams]

It seems to me a waste of money and rresources to dump huge dollars into a investment that wears out simply by sitting there. If you aren't using the high range capabilities every day, then why toss an extra 10 grand into your car for something that does nothing but add weight to your car for 95 percent of the time. The leaf's range right now is perfect. All they need to do is sell an optional detachable 20 hp range extender engine tank combo that drives one or both of the rear wheels at highway speeds. Be a lot cheaper and lighter than adding all those batteries. And it would help to heat the cabin.

I assume "range extender" really means CO2 spewing gasoline engine? The LEAF isn't "perfect" with a gasoline engine, sorry.

 

[caffeinekid]

I drive between 100 and 150 miles daily during the week. This is a lot more than most people, and certainly more than the mean. Even with the MUCH improved battery of the 2014 model Leaf, I still have to use a QC station at least once a day. This privilege runs about $40/month. With a realized range of 150 miles, I could forgo the monthly $40.00 expense AND TIME/PLANNING to recharge. I could instead simply charge up overnight like I already do without the additional inconvenience of making sure I am near a QC station at the right time everyday. It is like others have already pointed out- manufacturers are liars. A 200 mile stated range is going to be lower, especially after a couple of years. Even with the lizard battery, that means 200 miles will only exist for a short time (maybe a few months) followed by 190 miles, then 180, etc.. What the 200 mile range does is secure a much better resale market.

Incidentally, I owned a Ford Aspire for about 6 months. The range on that car was about 200 miles. It sucked at the time, but the difference between then and now was having to actually fill the vehicle up at a gas station every day or two vs plugging in at home after work with an EV.

 

[dgpcolorado]

...For a driver with some inter-city ambitions:

You need access to a charging (supercharging?) network that is sufficiently built out that you can always find a charging station when you are between 20% and 40% charged, and then get back to 90% in a reasonable amount of time. 70 mile range doesn't cut it. 150 (actual) might. 2.5 hours of driving and 30 minutes of charging gets you there at about 50 mph average...

That might be the model for people using DCFC "quick charge" stations. But it works differently for Superchargers. Those charge more quickly up to about 50% SOC, from Tesla owner reports, so when doing long distance trips Tesla drivers try to get to the next station with a low SOC plus a buffer of perhaps 25 miles. A larger battery speeds things up by allowing more of the charging in the bottom 50% of the battery. Supercharger stations tend to be about 80 to 120 miles apart, depending on the terrain. The idea is to charge just enough to get to the next one, plus that buffer, and to monitor energy usage so that you can slow down a bit if you guessed wrong. It requires some planning at each stop for the next one (I would find that sort of thing fun and am looking forward to doing it someday).

That's why a 200 mile range is pretty much the minimum to make long distance Supercharger network trips practical: it allows for significantly faster charging and shorter stops because most of the charging is done in the lower half of the battery SOC. It is somewhat different from a typical QC pattern of trying to get 80% or so at each stop.

I mention this because a lot of people with QC experience don't seem to be familiar with Supercharger network strategies.

 

[ydnas7]

if a LEAF's range at window sticker 84miles has a LA4 distance of ~ 124miles
then a LEAF at window sticker 135miles gets a LA4 range of 200miles (extra CARB credit)
then a LEAF at window sticker 203miles gets a LA4 range of 300miles (max CARB credit, for nonswap EV)

I predict plenty of motivation to get window sticker 200miles for future 'compliance +' EVs as an alternative to H2 fuel cell cars
I also predict some of the more widely globally sold EVs will tend for the lower target due to costs

 

[TonyWilliams]

if a LEAF's range at window sticker 84miles has a LA4 distance of ~ 124miles
then a LEAF at window sticker 135miles gets a LA4 range of 200miles (extra CARB credit)
then a LEAF at window sticker 203miles gets a LA4 range of 300miles (max CARB credit, for nonswap EV)

I predict plenty of motivation to get window sticker 200miles for future 'compliance +' EVs as an alternative to H2 fuel cell cars
I also predict some of the more widely globally sold EVs will tend for the lower target due to costs

Those rules are changing in the 2018-2021 timeframe, so instead of credit for an individual car at XXX miles range, they will get some version of a fleet zero emission credit. I'm not sure exactly the finally calculation.

The point is that manufacturers won't be getting super credit for hydrogen (well, I guess we don't really know yet) and the leftover scraps for EV's.

 

[mbender]

... All they need to do is sell an optional detachable 20 hp range extender engine tank combo that drives one or both of the rear wheels at highway speeds. Be a lot cheaper and lighter than adding all those batteries. And it would help to heat the cabin.

I assume "range extender" really means CO2 spewing gasoline engine? The LEAF isn't "perfect" with a gasoline engine, sorry.

I agree, plus "All they need to do" wins my vote for understatement of the year (if not all of the years!) on MNL. If they did ever add such a range extender, they'd have to change the name of the car to LEAF Blower. ;-)