OrientExpress
Well-known member
Minority dissent noted.
1200 Mile Trip in the 2018 LEAF
- Thread starter SageBrush
- Start date
Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:
I just cannot understand why Nissan is not willing to update the software on 2018 Leafs in the USA.
GerryAZ said:
My opinion is that it would be completely out of character for them. It's clear they're only interested in new sales and don't understand any link between customer good will and sales.
Here's a few things that would have cost them very little:
1) Sell 40kWh batteries for all existing Leafs
2) Heat switch for 2011/2012 Leafs (AC button?)
3) Remove battery pairing limit
4) Remove data sharing nag screen for 2011/2012 on every startup
5) Fix 12v battery drain when plugged in but not charging.
6) Fix DC to DC converter to property charge the 12v battery, especially while plugged in.
7) Bring back 80% (or configurable!) charge limiting. I'd let the user enter any value 40-100%. Is the EPA going to rate range by 40% when it's a user setting?
All of the above are firmware or business changes. Tesla rolls these out for free. Not surprising they have the fanbase they do as a result.
Ship out a USB stick or package that users can install themselves. Or do OTA. Charge a nominal fee ($49-$99) to cover costs... Make money off owners upgrading batteries.
I may sound bitter. I'm not. I got a very nice young car with low mileage for a good price. I just hate to see Nissan squander an opportunity so badly, especially when it's solving such an important issue (AGW). People are buying these 2011-3/2013 cars and getting burned.
As an software developer and product owner, I would love to work at Nissan and solve these issues. It would make the world better for a number of people.
I'm fairly certain that Leafs have never been set up for OTA updates. I agree about their crass mentality, though. I was able to get a request for a cloth-upholstered SL passed to Nissan Corporate (USA I assume, but don't know). The response?
'The SL is our top luxury car. If you want cloth seats, get an SV.' This despite the fact that the SL now has features not available on the SV, like Around View and the Bose stereo. No comprehension at all there that there are many people who do not like leather interiors at all, and don't associate them with the peak of luxury. They just don't care anymore (if Corporate ever did) what people 'below them' think.
'The SL is our top luxury car. If you want cloth seats, get an SV.' This despite the fact that the SL now has features not available on the SV, like Around View and the Bose stereo. No comprehension at all there that there are many people who do not like leather interiors at all, and don't associate them with the peak of luxury. They just don't care anymore (if Corporate ever did) what people 'below them' think.
Having to charge on road trips may have some something to do with the focus, hmmm ?OrientExpress said:
As for the number of people affected, that is one of the "advantages" of a market flop I suppose. Very few customers, so few complaints :lol:
OrientExpress said:
Your POV is hobbled by the LEAF; Tesla owners say different.
I can easily travel 600 miles on the Supercharger network in a day with my Tesla Model 3 with no time penalty compared to my old ICE days. Past 600 miles I think there is a small time penalty but that is a distance beyond my desire and ability.
SageBrush said:
Your POV is hobbled by the LEAF; Tesla owners say different.
I can easily travel 600 miles on the Supercharger network in a day with my Tesla Model 3 with no time penalty compared to my old ICE days. Past 600 miles I think there is a small time penalty but that is a distance beyond my desire and ability.
I do not own an ICE car and I do not suffer any inconvenience. The Tesla is a full replacement, arguably more than a full replacement since I can always start the day with a full battery.
powersurge
Well-known member
The writer was incorrect in writing that they did the trip in the WRONG vehicle. They did the WRONG TRIP and pushed the car to its limits.
I don't think that anyone can complain about how that Leaf performed during that long trip. It was an adventure ride, like hiking the Appalachian trail, or going cross-country on a bicycle.
I think that the new E+ would do the trip wonderfully...
I don't think that anyone can complain about how that Leaf performed during that long trip. It was an adventure ride, like hiking the Appalachian trail, or going cross-country on a bicycle.
I think that the new E+ would do the trip wonderfully...
OrientExpress
Well-known member
In the 10 plus years that I have been covering this issue of BEVs being universal replacements for ICE vehicles, there is always the edge cases that do not represent the majority. Driving 600 miles in a BEV per day certainly is one of those.
Certainly it can be done, but it is not something that is easily accomplished by the average person, nor is it something that a rational person would even consider. Same as those that boast that they their only vehicle is an electric one, or that they have gone net zero. They are great sideshows, but not ready for primetime, nor something that a rational person would consider. Someday, but today they are still edge cases.
But the original argument still stands, that BEVs are not a reasonable alternative for ICEs or hybrids for long distance travel and that won’t change until a BEV can meet or beat the 80/400/30/30 rule.
Certainly it can be done, but it is not something that is easily accomplished by the average person, nor is it something that a rational person would even consider. Same as those that boast that they their only vehicle is an electric one, or that they have gone net zero. They are great sideshows, but not ready for primetime, nor something that a rational person would consider. Someday, but today they are still edge cases.
But the original argument still stands, that BEVs are not a reasonable alternative for ICEs or hybrids for long distance travel and that won’t change until a BEV can meet or beat the 80/400/30/30 rule.
WetEV
Well-known member
OrientExpress said:
What is "the 80/400/30/30 rule"?
Nubo
Well-known member
WetEV said:
I'm guessing
80 mph
400 mile range (@80mph)
30 minute charge
???
OrientExpress
Well-known member
The 80/400/30/30 rule are a set of BEV benchmarks that measure parity with ICE vehicles in the US. For BEVs to achieve mass market acceptance, they will need to achieve parity with all of these.
Today many BEVs have achieved parity with some of these benchmarks, but none have achieved them all.
80 - A BEV must be able to travel at 80 mph for its entire battery capacity and do it repeatedly.
400 - A BEV must be able to travel 400 miles on one charge
30 - A BEV must be able to recharge to achieve 80/400 in less than 30 minutes, and be able to do this repeatedly.
30 - A BEV must cost less than $30K before incentives and must be able to achieve 80/400/30.
What is the basis for 80/400/30/30?
Today there are any number of ICE vehicles available that can achieve this easily, and this has been the case for over ten years. For BEVs to receive mainstream buyer consideration they must have parity with the vehicles that they aim to replace.
Today many BEVs have achieved parity with some of these benchmarks, but none have achieved them all.
80 - A BEV must be able to travel at 80 mph for its entire battery capacity and do it repeatedly.
400 - A BEV must be able to travel 400 miles on one charge
30 - A BEV must be able to recharge to achieve 80/400 in less than 30 minutes, and be able to do this repeatedly.
30 - A BEV must cost less than $30K before incentives and must be able to achieve 80/400/30.
What is the basis for 80/400/30/30?
Today there are any number of ICE vehicles available that can achieve this easily, and this has been the case for over ten years. For BEVs to receive mainstream buyer consideration they must have parity with the vehicles that they aim to replace.
Our 12 year old Prius can easily beat that. Now we don't normally drive 80, generally 70ish on the interstate but our normal interstate driving would be:OrientExpress said:
70ish/600+/3?/25
I'm guessing at 80mph it would still be:
80/500+/3?/25
To us EVs work best for town driving where the recharge time isn't that big of a deal because it's being charged at home, the Leaf will easily to 80mph and our cost was under $30k before tax discounts about $22k after but our range would be hard pressed to hit 60miles @ 80mph but again it doesn't really mater for our use, for long trips we've got the Prius.
Ideally for a one vehicle family we'd probably have the Prius Prime, 20+ miles for a majority of gas-free in-town driving and 50+ MPG ICE which if they still have a 12gallon tank would equate to:
80/500+/3?/$25 after tax deduction of course only 20+ miles of that 500 would be EV or gas free but at 50+ MPG I don't mind burning a bit of gas
Again ideally the Prime would have a bigger battery, more like the Volt's 50+ mile EV range but it is what it is, hopefully by the time we need to replace the old Prius the new Prime will have a longer EV range, but not at the expense of the ICE MPG!
OrientExpress
Well-known member
SageBrush said:
Because the average price for a new automobile that can meet the 80/400/30/30 rule is less than $30,000 USD.
OrientExpress
Well-known member
No I’m answering your questions despite your ignorance of the topic.
DougWantsALeaf
Well-known member
My minivan (and previous Optima) only get about 230-250 mile range at 80mph. Not to mention (at least in Illinois) well above state limits.
I would agree the 65 or 70 mph sustained for 300 miles plus buffer would make it a cross country hauler.
E+ on flat ground is only good for about 200-220 at those speeds.
I would agree the 65 or 70 mph sustained for 300 miles plus buffer would make it a cross country hauler.
E+ on flat ground is only good for about 200-220 at those speeds.
OrientExpress
Well-known member
I’ve heard many comments about the range number. Most comments are usually like this “ 400 miles? Preposterous, my[fill in brand or model] only gets [fill in number]. “
The reason the number is 400 is because new mainstream ICE vehicles today have much improved efficiency which allows most cars to achieve a range of between 350 and 450 miles to a tank. It BEVs want parity with ICEs then that’s their number to meet or beat. I have a nine year old GTI that routinely gets 425-450 miles to a tank, so it’s not unreasonable to demand a BEV to do the same.
The reason the number is 400 is because new mainstream ICE vehicles today have much improved efficiency which allows most cars to achieve a range of between 350 and 450 miles to a tank. It BEVs want parity with ICEs then that’s their number to meet or beat. I have a nine year old GTI that routinely gets 425-450 miles to a tank, so it’s not unreasonable to demand a BEV to do the same.