2011 Leaf at constant "9 bars" so no help from Nissan

I've never been treated so badly as a customer as I was with Nissan Consumer Affairs. After my Service Advisor said my Leaf was at 9 bars, not the required 8 bars for replacement, he could not replace the battery. But he said Nissan often worked with customers to reach a satisfactory outcome. He actually showed me one customer invoice as an example of Nissan granting an "exception" to their stated policy.

We were one of the first customers to give the Leaf a try in 2011. We've only logged 33,000 miles on the car but the battery clearly needs replacing. A full charge starts at 72 miles, yet I only get appx 42-45 miles total. I am not a crazy driver running the heater or AC non-stop.

Nissan insists that 9 bars = no new battery and does not make any consideration of shortened range. So...what's the value of a car that can't be used for a commute? Nothing.

I would never buy another Leaf and certainly I would not put my trust in Nissan. They are terrible to customers. Just plain rude.

Sorry to hear about your case but the '11 and '12 Leaf never had any capacity warranty. It didn't come about until later, primarily due to the Klee class action suit settlement besides all the bad press coverage and complaints from those in Phoenix.

LeafOwner2011 said:

I've never been treated so badly as a customer as I was with Nissan Consumer Affairs. After my Service Advisor said my Leaf was at 9 bars, not the required 8 bars for replacement, he could not replace the battery. But he said Nissan often worked with customers to reach a satisfactory outcome. He actually showed me one customer invoice as an example of Nissan granting an "exception" to their stated policy.

Click to expand...

He can replace it. It'll just be $5500 + kit and labor (http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=17168), which is definitely not worth it, in my book due to the poor resale of Leafs.

I've not seen cases of assistance until the battery was down to 8 bars, not 9. That said, it has been VERY YMMV how much assistance Nissan corporate has provided once down to 8 bars or less after the 5 year/60K capacity warranty has expired. It's been as little as absolutely $0 to maybe 80% coverage of the cost of the battery. Maybe a few have gotten the whole covered?

Unfortunately, Nissan isn't legally obligated to help once the capacity warrant has expired as it doesn't have any pro-rated aspect.

LeafOwner2011 said:

We were one of the first customers to give the Leaf a try in 2011. We've only logged 33,000 miles on the car but the battery clearly needs replacing. A full charge starts at 72 miles, yet I only get appx 42-45 miles total. I am not a crazy driver running the heater or AC non-stop.

Click to expand...

You are likely are doing one or more of these: leaving too much unused capacity on the table before calling it quits, running the AC and/or heater, possibly driving too fast, driving too inefficiently, have non-low rolling resistance tires, have underinflated tires, etc. Since you have range complaints, please answer the questions at http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=275421#p275421 here. If you aren't using Leaf Spy, you should, as you've probably noticed the instrumentation in an '11 is crap. It and the GOM (guess-o-meter) can cause unncessary range anxiety.

Leaf Spy will let you drive to lower states of charge w/much more confidence and help you adjust your driving so that you'll make it further w/o running out.

In the Phoenix range test at http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=228326, at steady 100 kph (~62 mph), an 8 bar car was able to make it 59 miles.

No doubt that the LEAF has been a lousy value for OP and I also would not be at all inclined to buy another car from Nissan, but Nissan has lived up to its warranty promises. I don't really expect any company to do more than what they promise and do not call them out for bad customer support for *only* honoring the warranty.

Some companies like Toyota go way beyond the warranty and I in turn buy their product as a result. Nissan very clearly does not come anywhere close to the high bar Toyota sets, but then few companies do.

Yep, Acura is another example... We had an Acura MDX that lost its transmission at 77,000 miles and 8 years, well out of warranty... Acura said that the transmission should not have failed that early and covered the entire cost of a replacement, even giving us a loaner while they had it.
Can you imagine something like that from Nissan or Infiniti? No, me neither...

SageBrush said:

Some companies like Toyota go way beyond the warranty and I in turn buy their product as a result. Nissan very clearly does not come anywhere close to the high bar Toyota sets, but then few companies do.

Click to expand...

Now for a different point of view.

A warranty is a warranty and has terms. Sometimes you qualify for relief by a warranty and sometimes not.

The question that I ask those that have similar issues is why did you buy your 2011 LEAF and not lease it in the first place. It appears that this was a major strategic error on the part of the OP.

First generation technology products always have issues, and today's EV technology is a work in progress for all manufacturers. It's a shared risk for the driver and the manufacturer at this state of the game.

Manufacturers deal with that risk by disclosure, by warranty, and by learning and fixing issues moving forward. Users of that technology need to do their homework and make acquisition decisions that minimize their risk too.

In my case, I had one of the very first 2011 LEAFs, and by the time it reached 38K miles it also had lost several bars. On a full charge it barely had 40 miles of range, and in the cold months and heater usage even less.

The difference is that I leased that car so that at the end of that lease, I was able to move to a 2014 LEAF lease for less money than the lease on the 2011 car. The 2014 now has over 40K miles today and still has all of its range that it had when new, and has yet to have a warranty claim.

Here I am at the end of 6 years of driving a LEAF and have only paid $19K* for the privilege. I also have received "no help from Nissan," but my experience with the car has been very positive.

Now I'm putting down a marker for a 2018 LEAF and expect to continue to ride the wave of quality improvements, technology enhancements and cost reductions on that car.

It's important for everyone to take responsibility for their financial and technology decisions, rather than blame the manufacturer when their expectations don't quite turn out as they expected.

*My actual out of pocket costs including maintenance, but not including electricity were more like $3.9K because of the 15K that I received from selling the car that the 2011 LEAF replaced, and the various incentives that are available.

Most of the lessons that have been learned about the Leaf have been learned well after 2011, so it's not the least bit fair to chastise the OP for not being able to see the future. Sure, now it's obvious that leasing is safer for an EV and especially for a Leaf, but back then it was largely uncharted territory.

As for the warranty, Nissan and Nissan dealers were wrong at best, and lied at worst, about the car's range and battery pack degradation rate. That negates pretty much all of your counterargument, and it's the reason for the Klee settlement.

None of the things I describe are unique to the LEAF, they are commonplace with all new technology. It's got nothing to do with foreseeing the future but rather is a natural part of innovation.

Leasing rather than buying early generation technology or assets that depreciates quickly because of innovation has been the norm quite literally for centuries.

Not paying attention when making a decision that goes bad is easily attributable to lies.

Klee is a great example of how unexpected results that can happen, especially for those that chose not to join the settlement class.

Well, we have a succinct summary of the Company Line, anyway.

LeftieBiker said:

Well, we have a succinct summary of the Company Line, anyway.

Click to expand...

Yep. For those newer here, Nissan made numerous claims that turned out to be not true for the '11 and '12 Leafs: http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=469608#p469608.

I highly doubt any '11 and '12 Leafs driven 7.5K miles/year or more will have 70% remaining capacity at the 10 year mark if still somehow on their original batteries.

But yes, sucks to be those who bought and won't get any warranty remedy from the Klee class action settlement or even a significantly discounted replacement battery.

LeftieBiker said:

Well, we have a succinct summary of the Company Line, anyway.

Click to expand...

It's also favored by those that make a habit of paying attention. :idea:

You can just contradict what has been written over several years, by many people, but in order to believe you we'd have to think that this site is frequented by numerous habitual liars who just happen to be Leaf drivers. We'd also have to ignore our own experiences with Nissan dealers, Nissan spokespeople, and even our own experiences with capacity loss and range shortfalls. That's asking a bit too much.

BTW, since you seem to have a connection with Nissan, in some way: pass on to them that we may extend our leases, but if delivery for the 2018 MY Leaf will be after the first of next year, we won't be waiting for it. There may already be a fix for the Bolt seat problem, and that's all it will take for many of us on the fence (along with the falling lease prices) to switch to a Bolt. It isn't so much that we like GM as that we don't regard them as being that much worse than Nissan.

OrientExpress said:

It's important for everyone to take responsibility for their financial and technology decisions, rather than blame the manufacturer when their expectations don't quite turn out as they expected.

Click to expand...

When the manufacturer consistently tells you that their battery is going to make it 5 years with 80% capacity and 8 years with 70% capacity with no apparent regard for climate despite the lack of thermal management and yet the only batteries that appear to be getting close to hitting those marks are used in the coldest climates, you better believe that the correct thing to do is to blame the manufacturer.

There's a reason the Klee class action lawsuit was successful, it's too bad the lawyers themselves appeared to be only interested in their specific clients and their own payday instead of the class as a whole.

I'm not sure how you managed to come out of 6 years of leasing having only paid $19k - the lease numbers I saw would have put me over $16k after only 3 years.

drees said:

OrientExpress said:

It's important for everyone to take responsibility for their financial and technology decisions, rather than blame the manufacturer when their expectations don't quite turn out as they expected.

Click to expand...

When the manufacturer consistently tells you that their battery is going to make it 5 years with 80% capacity and 8 years with 70% capacity with no apparent regard for climate despite the lack of thermal management and yet the only batteries that appear to be getting close to hitting those marks are used in the coldest climates, you better believe that the correct thing to do is to blame the manufacturer.

Click to expand...

Talk is cheap; the warranty matters and is the only backstop a customer can in the end demand that Nissan (or any other company) honor. If I am not mistaken, you are misquoting history. Nissan most surely broadcast loudly their expectations for battery life, but that is not a legally binding promise.

So now we know that Nissan quality and voluntary obligation does not extend past the warranty. This is their right, as it is our right as consumers to shop elsewhere -- for a better warranty, or a product that exceeds warranty provisions through better quality or subsidy by the company past their obligation . I'm in the somewhat odd position of somewhat defending Nissan the company while damning its EV product. I say 'somewhat' because I spend my new car money at companies that go beyond their legal obligations.

The point of my posts is that all early technologies are always fraught with uncertainty and the first LEAF was no exception. Yes, it had cases that expected battery life and forecast battery life did not meet expectations both from the manufacturer and those that bought the cars without fully understanding the risks of a first generation product. Making an investment in new technology can be fraught with unforeseen issues that can dampen enthusiasm for a product, and without paying proper attention to the risks can lead to frustration, confusion, and disappointment.

As you recall, Nissan makes an extra effort from day one in informing buyers of the LEAF that "your battery life performance and capacity may vary" by requiring acknowledgment of that by signing the Nissan LEAF customer disclosure form. Of course, it's one thing to sign a form, and another when the things that you warned about on the form actually happen.

The effects of climate change were also not factored into the equation, with the summer of 2011 being one of the hottest on record. This factor while not anticipated was significant in exposing an area for improvement in the design of the battery which has been accomplished by Nissan. The Klee settlement did accelerate the change in warranty terms for the LEAF, but as with most class actions, the plaintiff's legal team were the primary benefactors. The fact that Nissan bought back many cars that exhibited the issue with premature battery degragation early on via state lemon law provisions also seems to have been lost in the discussion too.

I'm encouraged that Nissan does value its LEAF customer base, and for the overwhelming majority of those that have a LEAF it has been a positive one. Remember, despite the sour experiences that some of you feel that you have had, the LEAF still is the best selling BEV in the history of the world. I also believe that Nissan will be working hard to restore the trust of those that feel that they were misled, lied to, or defrauded as they prepare the 2018 car for launch.

All I can say is that I experienced the exact same situation as many of you did with your 2011 LEAF and I was able to work out a satisfactory solution, and if I can do it, so can you. Peace.

SageBrush said:

So now we know that Nissan quality and voluntary obligation does not extend past the warranty. This is their right, as it is our right as consumers to shop elsewhere -- for a better warranty, or a product that exceeds warranty provisions through better quality or subsidy by the company past their obligation. I'm in the somewhat odd position of somewhat defending Nissan the company while damning its EV product. I say 'somewhat' because I spend my new car money at companies that go beyond their legal obligations.

Click to expand...

As Lee Iacocca once said "If you can find a better product, Buy it."

OrientExpress said:

....I'm encouraged that Nissan does value its LEAF customer base, and for the overwhelming majority of those that have a LEAF it has been a positive one. ...

Click to expand...

My experience has been positive, but I attributed it to the work of engineers who did their best to ensure early build quality...

Yes, maybe I am tending to snarky, but the certainty of your opinions seems too much so... The original LEAF is a fine seminal EV, but the lack of upgrade support, is indicative of the ongoing application of the disposable model to car sales...

Perhaps I've missed, but can't see you've provided much evidence that Nissan values it's customer base. The marketing department overstating much on product launch... I discounted all of it, based on more typical battery age out, but if I had relied on the claims for my daily commute or range needs, my feelings would be rather different..

The Klee settlement was BS, and as was said, lined the pockets of the lawyers more than anyone. And anyone outside the class, can likely use the statements of the marketing department to pursue.

And I am a happy LEAF owner... So how does Nissan value me as an owner now that I am out of warranty and have a battery that failed marketing claims? I hope to not find out... By not having separate parts listings for a tie rod if it's bent..? Nope, not that... There's a list of things Nissan does and doesn't do that support a premise of them not valuing the customer base of early adopters...

Their method seems to be hoping to use the passage of time to steam right by it...

Correct me if I am wrong.... 10 bars soon going on 9 here...

I am an early adopter in a hot climate and I do feel valued as a Nissan customer. I also feel like I was greatly supported by the forum, by Tony Williams and by the "Phoenix 12".

I leased an early-2011 without a capacity warranty and I signed the acknowledgment that capacity degradation could happen more rapidly than anticipated. But when I experience 4 bar loss - before the Klee suit was settled - Nissan replaced my battery. This, in additional to Nissan participating in the forum at that time, involving EVChels, forming the LAB, various VPP discount offers and even the new lease extension program makes me feel like Nissan cares. There is no doubt they have had some PR flubs, especially with the ad-hoc / non-consistent handling of out-of-warranty issues, but I do feel like they care about their customers.

All of that being said, I am very sorry to hear about the OPs issues. Battery degradation sucks whether it happens in year 2 or in year 6.

JimSouCal said:

The original LEAF is a fine seminal EV, but the lack of upgrade support is indicative of the ongoing application of the disposable model to car sales...

Click to expand...

I'd like to comment as well on product upgrades.

Historically users of tech have had always expressed a desire for manufacturers to provide upgrade paths. At first glance, this seems like a reasonable request. The idea of upgrading a legacy product so that it can perform like the most current one is a good idea in itself, but the devil is in the details and the costs associated with the upgrade.

It turns out that almost universally upgrading a widget on a piece of hardware means upgrading all of the ancillary widgets that make the first widget work. Then there is the obsolescence of the widget that has been replaced by newer tech, which may not be easily compatible with the connection to legacy tech that is not being upgraded. Add to that costs and efforts with inventory, installation issues, training, marketing, support etc. What happens is that even if something can be upgraded, it ends up being unwieldy and unreliable and very expensive. The recent upgrade from 2G to 3G on the LEAF's infotainment system is a good example of how difficult it can be.

Then there is the issue of something called the "Take-Rate." In other words, how many of those that want the upgrade are actually going to pay what it costs to offer that upgrade? That is where things go south very quickly. Overhead for upgrades tend to be so expensive and have such a low take-rate that it is easier cheaper and better to acquire the latest version.

I don't see any indication that Nissan, VW, Hyundai, Ford, GM, FCA, Volvo, or even Tesla for their mainstream vehicles will be offering traction battery or any other hardware upgrades anytime soon for their existing fleets.

The speed that tech innovation moves today, especially with EVs, means that the only logical way to approach it is to accept that what you acquire today will be superseded by something better, faster, cheaper, more reliable in the next three or four years.

No doubt about it -- early adoption has a bleeding edge. The cliche embodies a basic truth about risk of jumping on new technology. That said, Nissan's willingness to leave customers with unusable cars after five years that cost $25 - $30k USD rubs me the wrong way. I understand glitches; I understand rough edges. I understand rapid depreciation.

I don't accept exploitation, and this is the reason I would not consider or recommend a new Nissan EV to anyone unless the letter of the warranty is acceptable to that consumer. I personally think NIssan has burnt a lot of bridges and a generous, pro-rata warranty will be the minimum required for most informed consumers to consider buying an EV from them.

LeafOwner2011 said:

I've never been treated so badly as a customer as I was with Nissan Consumer Affairs .... We were one of the first customers to give the Leaf a try in 2011. We've only logged 33,000 miles on the car... So what's the value of a car that can't be used for a commute? Nothing. ... I would never buy another Leaf and certainly I would not put my trust in Nissan. They are terrible to customers. Just plain rude.

Click to expand...

So 6 years and drove the car 33k miles (~5500 per year or about 1.5 miles per day), and they are worried about a car that can't be used to commute more than 40 mile per day? Why?

and never came back to comment. Smells like Troll