DaveinOlyWA
Posts: 13228
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:43 pm
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2018
Leaf Number: 314199
Location: Olympia, WA
Contact: Website

Re: Yikes, degradation is looking bad (2018 Leaf)

Fri Aug 03, 2018 3:39 pm

tuningin wrote:Looks like our heatwave that we've been having is taking it's toll on the battery. I just went from 10% last month at 9000 miles to 13.7% loss and I am now at 10,500 miles.


hmmm, interesting. I am seeing a steady decline punctuated by two massive drops. The biggest drop happened after the car was parked (at 42% SOC) for a few weeks which did have temps in the 90's but its hard for me to blame that since my QC habits has my car at 110º for 3 days at a stretch (I work 4 10's) nearly every week and that doesn't increase my rate of drop...

I almost wonder if the BMS does a periodic self calibration I am just seeing adjustments...
2011 SL; 44,598 miles. 2013 S; 44,840 miles.2016 S30 deceased. 29,413 miles. 2018 S40; 11,987 miles, 485 GIDs, 37.6 kwh 110.89 Ahr , SOH 96.00, Hx 115.22
My Blog; http://daveinolywa.blogspot.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

SageBrush
Posts: 2803
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: Colorado

Re: Yikes, degradation is looking bad (2018 Leaf)

Fri Aug 03, 2018 3:55 pm

Kieran973 wrote:[Basically, I'm aiming to put about 12,000 miles a year on the Leaf and only 7,000 a year on the CRV.

Nice reasoning. In your shoes I would shoot for a 200+ range car. It would make your plan much more likely to succeed over time or even work out better. You may also want to take into account battery degradation in the non Tesla choices, in particular the 2018 LEAF

My distinct impression is that EVs that just barely seem to be a workable solution today are not good plans. Between weather, changing driving plans and battery degradation, there is just too much that is going to happen too often to make the choice seem like a good one a couple years later.
2013 LEAF 'S' Model with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California
Car is now enjoying an easy life in Colorado
3/2018: 58 Ahr, 28k miles
-----
2018 Tesla Model 3 LR, Delivered 6/2018

tattoogunman
Posts: 149
Joined: Tue Jun 07, 2016 6:17 pm
Delivery Date: 08 Jun 2016
Location: Plano, Texas

Re: Yikes, degradation is looking bad (2018 Leaf)

Sat Aug 04, 2018 6:01 pm

DaveinOlyWA wrote:Supposedly a study says a car is in "replacement" mode when it hits 150,000 miles. This seems rather plausible. I prefer to replace sooner if purchased new, others go much longer. This is where the stats become murky. I have had cars well beyond 150,000 miles mostly because they were bought used so expectations were simply created on a different scale, different criteria, etc.

But the reality is most people don't keep cars 15 years. The average time is closer to 7 years. In this day and age, a lot has to do with changing tech. I kept my truck for decades because it was bought for a purpose and continued to do that specific purpose. But cars are different. Its hard to spend $$$$ on something than hang on to it a long time because they get outdated quickly and that applies to EVs much more than the average car.

So the decision is buy it for $$$$$ and hold it until its worth $$$ and trade it in for the latest trinkets for a "little" money (is there such a thing?) or put up with it until its only worth $$ and basically sell it used (since the dealer might give you ¾$ if you are lucky) and restart the new car buying process from scratch.

So yeah, some people will buy their Tesla and drive it 20 years and still have 70% of their "way more than we needed" range left but they would not be the norm. Every day I see people who bought Teslas a few years ago or such (and yeah a LOT of them only did it to get their T3 sooner) only to trade up.

But I have always considered the degradation factor although I have been lucky in the past and this is the first LEAF that had enough range new that I could live with on 9 bars while torturously waiting for the anticipated #8 exodus. Granted, a much easier transpo need helps.

But then again, I could always switch to the Niro. ;)


While I'm sure there will be an exception, I seriously doubt anyone in the financial position to spend anywhere from $60K to over $120K for a Tesla is NOT going to keep it for 20 years (I'm ignoring the Model 3 since there is no $35K model yet and everyone I've talked to who have them have spent $50K to $60K for theirs). Those people will continue moving on to the next new shiny or, at the very least, move on to the next Tesla offering. Many people are also leasing theirs (not everyone obviously), so there is that factor as well. Given some of the people I follow on various media forums have already spent tens of thousands of dollars repairing their Tesla once it is out of warranty, that needs to be factored in to anyone seriously considering long term ownership.

I'm in the opposite camp and so are the people that I tend to hang with - we're low income and therefore we hang on to our cars as long as we can (and work on them ourselves in many cases to help keep costs down) simply because we cannot afford to hop cars every few years. Nobody that I know who is rich enough to spend Tesla money on a car keeps them more than a few years, it's just part of their lifestyle. Again, that's not everyone in that higher income bracket obviously, but I would argue it's a good percentage of them.

I hope that the used EV market continues in the direction that it has been going (i.e. they are relatively inexpensive compared to what they cost new) so that I (and others) might have a snowball's chance in H E double hockey sticks of affording an EV one day. I'm also keeping up with the news and people on the various forums regarding the continued degradation issue. I still think Nissan dropped the ball by not including active cooling on the new model (supposedly being corrected for the '19 model from what I've heard).

Evoforce
Posts: 828
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2015 9:58 pm
Delivery Date: 28 Feb 2015
Location: Fountain Hills Arizona

Re: Yikes, degradation is looking bad (2018 Leaf)

Sat Aug 04, 2018 7:33 pm

tattoogunman wrote:
DaveinOlyWA wrote:Supposedly a study says a car is in "replacement" mode when it hits 150,000 miles. This seems rather plausible. I prefer to replace sooner if purchased new, others go much longer. This is where the stats become murky. I have had cars well beyond 150,000 miles mostly because they were bought used so expectations were simply created on a different scale, different criteria, etc.

But the reality is most people don't keep cars 15 years. The average time is closer to 7 years. In this day and age, a lot has to do with changing tech. I kept my truck for decades because it was bought for a purpose and continued to do that specific purpose. But cars are different. Its hard to spend $$$$ on something than hang on to it a long time because they get outdated quickly and that applies to EVs much more than the average car.

So the decision is buy it for $$$$$ and hold it until its worth $$$ and trade it in for the latest trinkets for a "little" money (is there such a thing?) or put up with it until its only worth $$ and basically sell it used (since the dealer might give you ¾$ if you are lucky) and restart the new car buying process from scratch.

So yeah, some people will buy their Tesla and drive it 20 years and still have 70% of their "way more than we needed" range left but they would not be the norm. Every day I see people who bought Teslas a few years ago or such (and yeah a LOT of them only did it to get their T3 sooner) only to trade up.

But I have always considered the degradation factor although I have been lucky in the past and this is the first LEAF that had enough range new that I could live with on 9 bars while torturously waiting for the anticipated #8 exodus. Granted, a much easier transpo need helps.

But then again, I could always switch to the Niro. ;)


While I'm sure there will be an exception, I seriously doubt anyone in the financial position to spend anywhere from $60K to over $120K for a Tesla is NOT going to keep it for 20 years (I'm ignoring the Model 3 since there is no $35K model yet and everyone I've talked to who have them have spent $50K to $60K for theirs). Those people will continue moving on to the next new shiny or, at the very least, move on to the next Tesla offering. Many people are also leasing theirs (not everyone obviously), so there is that factor as well. Given some of the people I follow on various media forums have already spent tens of thousands of dollars repairing their Tesla once it is out of warranty, that needs to be factored in to anyone seriously considering long term ownership.

I'm in the opposite camp and so are the people that I tend to hang with - we're low income and therefore we hang on to our cars as long as we can (and work on them ourselves in many cases to help keep costs down) simply because we cannot afford to hop cars every few years. Nobody that I know who is rich enough to spend Tesla money on a car keeps them more than a few years, it's just part of their lifestyle. Again, that's not everyone in that higher income bracket obviously, but I would argue it's a good percentage of them.

I hope that the used EV market continues in the direction that it has been going (i.e. they are relatively inexpensive compared to what they cost new) so that I (and others) might have a snowball's chance in H E double hockey sticks of affording an EV one day. I'm also keeping up with the news and people on the various forums regarding the continued degradation issue. I still think Nissan dropped the ball by not including active cooling on the new model (supposedly being corrected for the '19 model from what I've heard).


While I might agree with much of what you both said, both of you are trying to justify why you don't have a Tesla. OK, I can understand not being able to afford the purchase but the repair out of warranty (while a concern) is generally being overblown. Also, many Tesla owners talk of keeping their cars for many many years. I also agree we have to look at (just like with Leaf) the secondary market as it will continue to put these used cars at a lower price point to where they become more affordable to others. Tesla, just as with the Leaf, is hard to determine how long it will be financially viable to keep them on the road. We have to see what third party vendors/repairers pop up and/or if the original manufactures step up and provide reasonably priced parts. Exciting times though! Should be many more choices of cars and manufacturers in the near future! Oh and... at lower prices.
*2011 Leaf 1 bought 2/28/15 @ 28,000ish mi 10 bar (8 bars @ 11/25/15 @ 37,453 ) (New lizard @ 39,275 mi @ 1/20/2016) Now 52,166 mi.
*Tesla Model S 61,000 mi
*2011 Leaf 2 bought 4/28/15 @ 24,000ish mi 12 bar (new lizard Dec. 2014 @ 22,273 mi) Now 35,485 mi

DaveinOlyWA
Posts: 13228
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:43 pm
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2018
Leaf Number: 314199
Location: Olympia, WA
Contact: Website

Re: Yikes, degradation is looking bad (2018 Leaf)

Sat Aug 04, 2018 8:08 pm

Evoforce wrote:
tattoogunman wrote:
DaveinOlyWA wrote:Supposedly a study says a car is in "replacement" mode when it hits 150,000 miles. This seems rather plausible. I prefer to replace sooner if purchased new, others go much longer. This is where the stats become murky. I have had cars well beyond 150,000 miles mostly because they were bought used so expectations were simply created on a different scale, different criteria, etc.

But the reality is most people don't keep cars 15 years. The average time is closer to 7 years. In this day and age, a lot has to do with changing tech. I kept my truck for decades because it was bought for a purpose and continued to do that specific purpose. But cars are different. Its hard to spend $$$$ on something than hang on to it a long time because they get outdated quickly and that applies to EVs much more than the average car.

So the decision is buy it for $$$$$ and hold it until its worth $$$ and trade it in for the latest trinkets for a "little" money (is there such a thing?) or put up with it until its only worth $$ and basically sell it used (since the dealer might give you ¾$ if you are lucky) and restart the new car buying process from scratch.

So yeah, some people will buy their Tesla and drive it 20 years and still have 70% of their "way more than we needed" range left but they would not be the norm. Every day I see people who bought Teslas a few years ago or such (and yeah a LOT of them only did it to get their T3 sooner) only to trade up.

But I have always considered the degradation factor although I have been lucky in the past and this is the first LEAF that had enough range new that I could live with on 9 bars while torturously waiting for the anticipated #8 exodus. Granted, a much easier transpo need helps.

But then again, I could always switch to the Niro. ;)


While I'm sure there will be an exception, I seriously doubt anyone in the financial position to spend anywhere from $60K to over $120K for a Tesla is NOT going to keep it for 20 years (I'm ignoring the Model 3 since there is no $35K model yet and everyone I've talked to who have them have spent $50K to $60K for theirs). Those people will continue moving on to the next new shiny or, at the very least, move on to the next Tesla offering. Many people are also leasing theirs (not everyone obviously), so there is that factor as well. Given some of the people I follow on various media forums have already spent tens of thousands of dollars repairing their Tesla once it is out of warranty, that needs to be factored in to anyone seriously considering long term ownership.

I'm in the opposite camp and so are the people that I tend to hang with - we're low income and therefore we hang on to our cars as long as we can (and work on them ourselves in many cases to help keep costs down) simply because we cannot afford to hop cars every few years. Nobody that I know who is rich enough to spend Tesla money on a car keeps them more than a few years, it's just part of their lifestyle. Again, that's not everyone in that higher income bracket obviously, but I would argue it's a good percentage of them.

I hope that the used EV market continues in the direction that it has been going (i.e. they are relatively inexpensive compared to what they cost new) so that I (and others) might have a snowball's chance in H E double hockey sticks of affording an EV one day. I'm also keeping up with the news and people on the various forums regarding the continued degradation issue. I still think Nissan dropped the ball by not including active cooling on the new model (supposedly being corrected for the '19 model from what I've heard).


While I might agree with much of what you both said, both of you are trying to justify why you don't have a Tesla. OK, I can understand not being able to afford the purchase but the repair out of warranty (while a concern) is generally being overblown. Also, many Tesla owners talk of keeping their cars for many many years. I also agree we have to look at (just like with Leaf) the secondary market as it will continue to put these used cars at a lower price point to where they become more affordable to others. Tesla, just as with the Leaf, is hard to determine how long it will be financially viable to keep them on the road. We have to see what third party vendors/repairers pop up and/or if the original manufactures step up and provide reasonably priced parts. Exciting times though! Should be many more choices of cars and manufacturers in the near future! Oh and... at lower prices.


Agreed. My original plan when I had my 2016 with lease ending Nov 2019 was to look at CPO tesla 3's which I figured would be hitting the market but the accident did happen and the base model being delayed means an overpriced used market that will last well beyond late 2019
2011 SL; 44,598 miles. 2013 S; 44,840 miles.2016 S30 deceased. 29,413 miles. 2018 S40; 11,987 miles, 485 GIDs, 37.6 kwh 110.89 Ahr , SOH 96.00, Hx 115.22
My Blog; http://daveinolywa.blogspot.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Kieran973
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2018 6:51 pm
Delivery Date: 20 Jun 2018

Re: Yikes, degradation is looking bad (2018 Leaf)

Sat Aug 04, 2018 10:54 pm

In your shoes I would shoot for a 200+ range car. It would make your plan much more likely to succeed over time or even work out better. You may also want to take into account battery degradation in the non Tesla choices, in particular the 2018 LEAF


Again, good points. And I think your characterization of the 2018 Leaf as a .75 car now and .5 car later is very apt.

To be honest, I have been considering holding off on the 2018 and waiting for the 2019 to come out. The 2019 sounds like a much better, more reliable long-term car. However, while the E-Plus seems at first glance to be objectively so much better (assuming these rumors/reports are true: 225 miles of range, a liquid-cooled LG Chem battery, 100 kW fast charging speed), the more I think about it, it's not totally clear to me that these rumored improvements are worth the significant price hike. Because if you can buy a 2018 right now for around 20K after tax credits/dealer discounts, and you can buy a E-Plus this fall/winter for either high 20's or low 30's after tax credits (I'm assuming there probably won't be any dealer discounts on this car for a while, and when they do come, they certainly shouldn't be as steep as the discounts on the 2017 and 2018 ), then these are the questions I would have about the E-Plus:

1. 100 kW of charging: sounds nice, but by what year will there actually be any 100+ kW fast chargers around? 2020? 2025? On the east coast, there is one 150-350 kW DC charger in Chicopee, MA, but everything else is restricted to 50 kW. I read somewhere that the EVGo network has been pre-wired for 150 kW. But can all these stations be converted to 150 kW quickly, OTA, as a software update? Or will they instead require a technician visiting every single station? How many years will that take if it even happens? So then how valuable is 100 kW fast charging in the real world, unless the entire fast charge network is overhauled ASAP?

2. On a 250 mile road trip, how much time does 100 kW fast charging actually save you over 50 kW fast charging? 10 minutes? Less than 10 minutes? I actually find the advertised 100 kW quick charge times of the upcoming Kona EV, Niro EV, and Leaf E-Plus to be confusing. A lot of car reviews say that at 100 kW, these cars can charge up to 80% in 54 minutes. Well, no one routinely drives their EV down to true zero and then quick charges to 80%, so I'm assuming this means quick charging from either 10 or 20% up to 80%? Let's say it's 10-80%, so these cars can gain 70% charge in 54 minutes. For the Leaf E-Plus, that's 225 miles x .7 = 157.5 miles/54 minutes = 2.91666 miles per minute (on average). For the Kona EV, it's 250 miles x .7 = 175 miles/54 minutes = 3.24 miles per minute. So let's say that these new EVs can quick charge at 3 miles per minute on 100 kW chargers. Well, the Chevy Bolt can already do this, at least according to Chevy's advertised "ideal conditions": it can gain 90 miles of charge in 30 minutes (when the SOC is between 0-50%), which also comes out to 3 miles per minute. I'm assuming this is on a 50 kW charger? So how is the 100 kW charger better? There must be something wrong with my math, or I'm misunderstanding something.

3. 225 miles of range: 75 miles of extra range is great, but is it worth a 10K price hike? On a 250 mile drive, the only advantage that a 225 mile EV has over a 150 mile EV is that the 225 mile EV can do the trip in one DCQC stop (probably 20 minutes or less), while the 150 mile EV can do it in 2 DCQC stops (each lasting 20-25 minutes). So then you're paying 10K extra just so that a few times a year you save yourself 20-25 minutes during these 250 mile trips?

4. liquid-cooled LG Chem battery: this is great, I hope it's real.

5. Rapid-gate in the E-Plus?: The Chevy Bolt also has a liquid-cooled LG Chem battery, but even this car has throttled quick charging (above 50% SOC). Given Nissan's recent handling of the rapidgate issue on the 2018, how confident are we that the E-Plus (even with a liquid-cooled LG Chem battery) won't also have some ridiculous quick charge throttling issue, either on the second quick charge of the day, or above a certain battery temp, etc?

(My apologies if people feel like this thread has strayed off topic)

DaveinOlyWA
Posts: 13228
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:43 pm
Delivery Date: 16 Feb 2018
Leaf Number: 314199
Location: Olympia, WA
Contact: Website

Re: Yikes, degradation is looking bad (2018 Leaf)

Sun Aug 05, 2018 6:16 am

Kieran973 wrote:
In your shoes I would shoot for a 200+ range car. It would make your plan much more likely to succeed over time or even work out better. You may also want to take into account battery degradation in the non Tesla choices, in particular the 2018 LEAF


Again, good points. And I think your characterization of the 2018 Leaf as a .75 car now and .5 car later is very apt.

To be honest, I have been considering holding off on the 2018 and waiting for the 2019 to come out. The 2019 sounds like a much better, more reliable long-term car. However, while the E-Plus seems at first glance to be objectively so much better (assuming these rumors/reports are true: 225 miles of range, a liquid-cooled LG Chem battery, 100 kW fast charging speed), the more I think about it, it's not totally clear to me that these rumored improvements are worth the significant price hike. Because if you can buy a 2018 right now for around 20K after tax credits/dealer discounts, and you can buy a E-Plus this fall/winter for either high 20's or low 30's after tax credits (I'm assuming there probably won't be any dealer discounts on this car for a while, and when they do come, they certainly shouldn't be as steep as the discounts on the 2017 and 2018 ), then these are the questions I would have about the E-Plus:

1. 100 kW of charging: sounds nice, but by what year will there actually be any 100+ kW fast chargers around? 2020? 2025? On the east coast, there is one 150-350 kW DC charger in Chicopee, MA, but everything else is restricted to 50 kW. I read somewhere that the EVGo network has been pre-wired for 150 kW. But can all these stations be converted to 150 kW quickly, OTA, as a software update? Or will they instead require a technician visiting every single station? How many years will that take if it even happens? So then how valuable is 100 kW fast charging in the real world, unless the entire fast charge network is overhauled ASAP?

2. On a 250 mile road trip, how much time does 100 kW fast charging actually save you over 50 kW fast charging? 10 minutes? Less than 10 minutes? I actually find the advertised 100 kW quick charge times of the upcoming Kona EV, Niro EV, and Leaf E-Plus to be confusing. A lot of car reviews say that at 100 kW, these cars can charge up to 80% in 54 minutes. Well, no one routinely drives their EV down to true zero and then quick charges to 80%, so I'm assuming this means quick charging from either 10 or 20% up to 80%? Let's say it's 10-80%, so these cars can gain 70% charge in 54 minutes. For the Leaf E-Plus, that's 225 miles x .7 = 157.5 miles/54 minutes = 2.91666 miles per minute (on average). For the Kona EV, it's 250 miles x .7 = 175 miles/54 minutes = 3.24 miles per minute. So let's say that these new EVs can quick charge at 3 miles per minute on 100 kW chargers. Well, the Chevy Bolt can already do this, at least according to Chevy's advertised "ideal conditions": it can gain 90 miles of charge in 30 minutes (when the SOC is between 0-50%), which also comes out to 3 miles per minute. I'm assuming this is on a 50 kW charger? So how is the 100 kW charger better? There must be something wrong with my math, or I'm misunderstanding something.

3. 225 miles of range: 75 miles of extra range is great, but is it worth a 10K price hike? On a 250 mile drive, the only advantage that a 225 mile EV has over a 150 mile EV is that the 225 mile EV can do the trip in one DCQC stop (probably 20 minutes or less), while the 150 mile EV can do it in 2 DCQC stops (each lasting 20-25 minutes). So then you're paying 10K extra just so that a few times a year you save yourself 20-25 minutes during these 250 mile trips?

4. liquid-cooled LG Chem battery: this is great, I hope it's real.

5. Rapid-gate in the E-Plus?: The Chevy Bolt also has a liquid-cooled LG Chem battery, but even this car has throttled quick charging (above 50% SOC). Given Nissan's recent handling of the rapidgate issue on the 2018, how confident are we that the E-Plus (even with a liquid-cooled LG Chem battery) won't also have some ridiculous quick charge throttling issue, either on the second quick charge of the day, or above a certain battery temp, etc?

(My apologies if people feel like this thread has strayed off topic)


**the faster east coast charger is CCS only. Chademo is still currently 50 KW everywhere with a mention they were "upgradeable"

Your analysis is spot on but the key takeaway for me is that 90 miles of range I had in my 24 kwh LEAF gave me XX options for charging. Then 110 miles in my 30 kwh LEAF gave me XXX options for charging.

Now my 40 kwh LEAF gives me XXXX options. It has become less about the speed of charging and more about what chargers I can skip. What I have discovered is that frequently "I" have to stop more than the car does. Lately roadtrips have consisted of both convenience and "highly recommended" charging stops which boosts the range.

Now, all that is great on the surface but the "rapidgate" issue complicates the matter. The other thing is that the "$20,000 LEAF" is not really available any more unless your state has great incentives.

In the past few weeks, I have done a bit of both. Trips with a lot of short charging stops and ones with only a few. I did on Thurs that was 350 miles and was "supposed" to have 3 charging stops only but my bladder detoured me so I plugged in and glad I did because it was a good 10 min wait for a bathroom. I ended up getting a decent charge bump (8 kwh) that I did not need.

So I continued to the station I had planned the long charge at, got it then went to Yakima for grand opening of new charger there and charged there during the festivities but only got 6.25 kwh (did it more for the Plugshare check in than anything else) which was needed but the plan was doing it on level 2 in town. I expected there to be a lot of people who needed charge more than me but most were local and didn't charge at all.

Anyway, now I am rambling but the key is having the greater range gives you the greater choices. It is not a "great" idea to run from full to empty in any EV unless the range is so short you have no choice.

Too many people are turned off to the LEAF because "I had to charge 80 minutes to fill up" statements. Unless it was a destination stop, I don't blame them! But I got a significant charge with hot pack in 50 minutes. (Would have been less time but the activities planned took longer than expected)

So its my take that yeah the 60 kwh pack will be more money, like $ 5.000 more but a 2019 with 40 kwh pack will be nearly the same as the 2018, will still have the fed credit intact and hopefully no QC slow down issues below 60% SOC
2011 SL; 44,598 miles. 2013 S; 44,840 miles.2016 S30 deceased. 29,413 miles. 2018 S40; 11,987 miles, 485 GIDs, 37.6 kwh 110.89 Ahr , SOH 96.00, Hx 115.22
My Blog; http://daveinolywa.blogspot.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

kosjet
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2018 5:05 pm
Delivery Date: 29 Sep 2018
Leaf Number: 317089
Location: Delaware

Re: Yikes, degradation is looking bad (2018 Leaf)

Mon Oct 15, 2018 7:37 pm

So I think all this negativity about the 2018 Leaf is a bit unfair. Let's keep things in perspective here.
  • The battery warrany is 8 years/100k miles @ lets say 60% capacity
  • That means the worst case scenario is that you will have 91 miles of EPA range at the 8 year or 100k mile mark
It may not work for everyone, but there are a wide range of people that this would work for just fine. You have to ask yourself a few questions:
  • Is your average daily commute/round trip less than 60 miles a day?
  • How frequency do you take road trips that are longer than 120 miles (this assumes 1 QC trips with charging at destination)
  • Do you live in a moderate climate and/or have access to garage parking?
  • Do you have a 2nd car?
The question you have to ask yourself is how many days a year does this profile satisfy you? For me the answer is 98% which means that about 7 days a year we will need to take my wife's car instead of mine. Keep in mind that this is the worst case scenario. Considering that the Leaf is about $5000 cheaper than the Bolt for the same trim level and includes tech that is not available in the Bolt, I think the Leaf is quite the value.

Does it work for everyone? No.
Could it work for a good percentage of people? I believe so.
2018 Leaf SL w/Tech delivered 9/29/2018

alozzy
Posts: 1122
Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2017 4:25 pm
Delivery Date: 18 Jan 2017
Location: Vancouver, BC
Contact: Website

Re: Yikes, degradation is looking bad (2018 Leaf)

Mon Oct 15, 2018 8:05 pm

The question is why would anyone gamble on the LEAF and its history of rapid battery degradation when other competitors are offering 40 kWh or more packs that DO have TMS.

Unless Nissan steps up to the plate and knocks out a home run (ie a 60 kWh pack, with TMS, available in 2019, at a lower price point than the competition), my next EV will be a Kona Electric, Niro EV, or possibly even an IONIQ or perhaps a Bolt.

What is the upside of buying a new LEAF at this point in time?
Vancouver, CA owner of a 2013 Ocean Blue SV + QC, purchased 01/2017 in WA
Zencar 12/20/24/30A L1/L2 portable EVSE
1-1/4" Curt #11396 hitch
After market, DIY LED DRLs
LeafSpy Pro + Konnwei KW902 ELM327 BT OBDII dongle
Loving my first BEV :D

smkettner
Posts: 7190
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 10:13 pm
Delivery Date: 26 Feb 2014
Location: Orange County, CA

Re: Yikes, degradation is looking bad (2018 Leaf)

Mon Oct 15, 2018 8:11 pm

alozzy wrote:The question is why would anyone gamble on the LEAF and its history of rapid battery degradation when other competitors are offering 40 kWh or more packs that DO have TMS.

Unless Nissan steps up to the plate and knocks out a home run (ie a 60 kWh pack, with TMS, available in 2019, at a lower price point than the competition), my next EV will be a Kona Electric, Niro EV, or possibly even an IONIQ or perhaps a Bolt.

What is the upside of buying a new LEAF at this point in time?
+1 on all that.

I honestly think Nissan has set the EV movement back 5 to 10 years due to the poor battery. If the original battery back in 2011 was worth anything I would still be driving a Nissan and they would be selling 5,000+ per month. We want a battery that holds up far more than a warranty to replace it three times.
1 bar lost at 21,451 miles, 16 months.
2 bar lost at 35,339 miles, 25 months.
LEAF traded at 45,400 miles for a RAV4-EV
I-Pace on order for end of 2018 delivery

Return to “LEAF Gen 2 & Infiniti EV”