2016 Leaf: How many kWh needed, and at what price?

[TomT]

It is certainly MY biggest complaint! 100 real-world, freeway speed limit, dependable, TMSed miles in a Leaf or Leaf form factor equivalent and I'd be a happy camper!

I thought the biggest complaint about Leaf is battery degrading.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

The Leaf has an EPA range of 75 miles and price of about 30k and the biggest complaint is lack of range.

The Tesla has an EPA range of 260 miles and a price of about 80k and the biggest complaint is high purchase price.

The company that gets to the middle ground the fastest will own the EV market IMO. Comments?

Disagree because a middle ground that requires $40,000 for the car aint a gonna work for 90% of us.

what people have to have is a way to work, the rest falls away during hard times and we will continue to have hard times. our economy REQUIRES it. its a regular financial cycle that will go on forever.

The LEAF is essentially owning the EV market and its simply too early in the game to tell. Its not the end product yet because there is still mass confusions, misconceptions (thank you Big Oil for your help in this area :evil: ) and Nissan is still playing the balancing game.

But the car that will own the market (60%) will be a 5 passenger sedan without storage compromises (bye bye Ford) that gets 100-150 (high end range will be an option) freeway miles and sells for no more than about $30,000 (keep in mind, the EV front runners will be at the end of the Government dole in a few years so pricing without incentives has to be considered)

Another very large segment will be SUV/Mini Van market. These will be in the 100-150 mile range again and run about 40%. Then we will have Tesla and their 10% and all the rest covering the remaining 10 %.

now all this is my opinion based on what little I understand on the psyche of Auto Manufacturers. Toyota is coming out with a fuel cell vehicle and wondering how long it will take before they announce their dealer installed fuel stations? :lol:

 

[KJD]

The Leaf has an EPA range of 75 miles and price of about 30k and the biggest complaint is lack of range.
The Tesla has an EPA range of 260 miles and a price of about 80k and the biggest complaint is high purchase price.
The company that gets to the middle ground the fastest will own the EV market IMO. Comments?

Disagree because a middle ground that requires $40,000 for the car aint a gonna work for 90% of us.
what people have to have is a way to work, the rest falls away during hard times and we will continue to have hard times. our economy REQUIRES it. its a regular financial cycle that will go on forever.
The LEAF is essentially owning the EV market and its simply too early in the game to tell.

Not sure if I agree with that. I would say Nissan is squandering the lead to Tesla. In fact if you look at 2013 YTD numbers the LEAF is number 3, behind the Tesla and the Volt.


http://insideevs.com/april-2013-plug-in-electric-vehicle-sales-report-card/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The point being, people are willing to pay for more kwh.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

The Leaf has an EPA range of 75 miles and price of about 30k and the biggest complaint is lack of range.
The Tesla has an EPA range of 260 miles and a price of about 80k and the biggest complaint is high purchase price.
The company that gets to the middle ground the fastest will own the EV market IMO. Comments?

Disagree because a middle ground that requires $40,000 for the car aint a gonna work for 90% of us.
what people have to have is a way to work, the rest falls away during hard times and we will continue to have hard times. our economy REQUIRES it. its a regular financial cycle that will go on forever.
The LEAF is essentially owning the EV market and its simply too early in the game to tell.

Not sure if I agree with that. I would say Nissan is squandering the lead to Tesla. In fact if you look at 2013 YTD numbers the LEAF is number 3, behind the Tesla and the Volt.


http://insideevs.com/april-2013-plug-in-electric-vehicle-sales-report-card/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The point being, people are willing to pay for more kwh.

I don't really believe you can post these numbers as being a realistic view of demand.

**for one, its a "bit" too early to create a trend line

**Tesla sales are primarily from 2+ years of pent up demand.

**Nissan is still ramping up a new model AND new assembly line and the available stock on the lots says they are struggling to do so.

** its clear that the Chevy Volt WILL BE PASSED by someone other than the LEAF because they are going down (at least until they change their pricing scheme)

to be fair, I am familiar with 5 people who are driving/getting Teslas. 2 signed up for their Tesla within months of the day I signed up for my LEAF (april 20, 2010) the other 3 park the Tesla next to their LEAF. Those 3 are a rare group (keep in mind, Seattle has 2nd largest Tesla market) and NOT typical.

I see Tesla settling into sales of 20-30,000 a year. I am willing to bet that the LEAF will top Tesla THIS year by 10,000+ units

 

[evnow]

Not sure if I agree with that. I would say Nissan is squandering the lead to Tesla. In fact if you look at 2013 YTD numbers the LEAF is number 3, behind the Tesla and the Volt.

Because first 2 months they didn't have cars to sell. Tesla is just fulfilling orders they got over several months/years. BTW, I'm 100% sure Leaf will beat Model S in 2013 - simply because Tesla has to start fulfilling European orders soon. They will probably sell 15k cars in the US total.

The point being, people are willing to pay for more kwh.

No - see RAV4 EV for eg.

People are willing to pay more for what they consider a "luxury" car.

 

[GRA]

FWIW, here's the base model MSRP (Max if known to be different from EPA)-EPA miles of various BEVs:

Leaf S $28,800/(84)-75 = ($342.86)-$384/mile
RAV4EV $49,800/(113)-103 = ($440.71)-$483.50/mile
Tesla S60 $69,900/208 = $336.05/mile
Tesla S85 $$79,900/265 = $301.51/mile

Here's $/kWh

Leaf S $28800/21-24kWh = $1,371.43-$1,200/kWh
RAV4EV $49,800/41.8-50kWh = $1,191.39-$996/kWh
Tesla S60 $69,900/60-?kWh = $1,165/kWh
Tesla S85 $79,900/85-?kWh = $940/kWh

Here's (Max)-EPA miles/Usable-Max kWh:

Leaf (84)-75/21-24 = 4-3.5/3.57-3.125m/kWh
RAV4EV (113)-103/41.8-50 = 2.70-2.26/2.46-2.06
Tesla S60 208/60?-? = 3.47m/kWh
Tesla S85 265/85?-? = 3.12m/kWh

Most of us seem to agree that $30k MSRP (i.e. no subsidy) is the price point beyond which the car moves out of the 'affordable' range, although many of us are willing to pay extra for more range if it's on offer. To get a Leaf S from 84 miles range (EPA 100%) or 75 miles range (EPA Average of 80% & 100%) to 100 miles in the same conditions, assuming weight/drag/usable SoC etc. remain unchanged, will require either 24kWh *1.19 = ~28.6kWh, or 24kWh x 1.33333 = 32 kWh.

Edit: Corrected Tesla S MSRPs

Edit: Added max. range values for Leaf and Rav4EV

 

[jlsoaz]

[...]
To get Leaf S from 84 miles range (EPA 100%) or 75 miles range (EPA Average of 80% & 100%) to 100 miles in the same conditions, assuming weight/drag/usable SoC etc. remain unchanged, [...]

Some interesting calculations. One slight disagreement: Assuming weight remains unchanged is not I think realistic (not super-important with these fairly moderate changes, but just maintaining some clarity on the matter of adding or removing batteries and accounting for weight and volume changes). One contributing factor we can I think assume as to why the Tesla gets worse miles/kWh is that the battery is larger and weighs more than a 24 kWh Tesla battery would weigh. If more kWh is added to the Leaf then while it is possible this can be done via changes in battery chemistry, it is quite possible, or I think probable in the near-term, that weight would change.

 

[GRA]

[...]
To get Leaf S from 84 miles range (EPA 100%) or 75 miles range (EPA Average of 80% & 100%) to 100 miles in the same conditions, assuming weight/drag/usable SoC etc. remain unchanged, [...]

Some interesting calculations. One slight disagreement: Assuming weight remains unchanged is not I think realistic (not super-important with these fairly moderate changes, but just maintaining some clarity on the matter of adding or removing batteries and accounting for weight and volume changes). One contributing factor we can I think assume as to why the Tesla gets worse miles/kWh is that the battery is larger and weighs more than a 24 kWh Tesla battery would weigh. If more kWh is added to the Leaf then while it is possible this can be done via changes in battery chemistry, it is quite possible, or I think probable in the near-term, that weight would change.

'Weight unchanged' assumes that the current batteries would be replaced by some with higher specific energy. If using the same batteries, then the weight would have to increase barring weight savings elsewhere (an all-composite Leaf!).

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

When did the EPA rating for the LEAF change?

 

[jlsoaz]

Not sure if I agree with that. I would say Nissan is squandering the lead to Tesla. In fact if you look at 2013 YTD numbers the LEAF is number 3, behind the Tesla and the Volt.

Because first 2 months they didn't have cars to sell. Tesla is just fulfilling orders they got over several months/years. [...]

Hi -

Judging by their recent statement, they are not "just fulfilling orders they got over several months/years.":

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318605/000119312513212354/d511008d10q.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
FORM 10-Q
Filing Date: 2013-05-10

We are currently receiving orders at a rate greater than 20,000 cars per year worldwide.

The point being, people are willing to pay for more kwh.

No - see RAV4 EV for eg.

Your broad dismissiveness is noted as to the proposition as to whether people are willing to pay more for more kWh. As to the 2013 RAV4 EV situation, it is I think a poor idea to draw too many conclusions. Toyota has communicated clearly via its actions that it does not intend for the 2013 RAV4 EV to become a true production vehicle and the vehicle certainly has not been made widely available in all of the same ways that something like a 2013 Toyota gasoline vehicle has been.

People are willing to pay more for what they consider a "luxury" car.

 

[KJD]

Not sure if I agree with that. I would say Nissan is squandering the lead to Tesla. In fact if you look at 2013 YTD numbers the LEAF is number 3, behind the Tesla and the Volt.

Because first 2 months they didn't have cars to sell. Tesla is just fulfilling orders they got over several months/years. BTW, I'm 100% sure Leaf will beat Model S in 2013 - simply because Tesla has to start fulfilling European orders soon. They will probably sell 15k cars in the US total.

The point being, people are willing to pay for more kwh.

No - see RAV4 EV for eg.
People are willing to pay more for what they consider a "luxury" car.

Yes you are correct LEAF inventories were very low in Jan and Feb of this year. Right now the Nissan dealer closest to me has exactly 1 LEAF SV in stock. I asked why and they said they sell a lot more SUV's and would I like to test drive an Armada. I said no thanks.

I am not too interested in compliance cars. However the RAV4 EV was something I thought about until I talked to the local Toyota dealer. No they can not order it in. No they do not want to service it, if I bought it in CA and had it shipped here. Not really interested in trailering it to CA for a warranty issue should it arrise.

 

[GRA]

When did the EPA rating for the LEAF change?

2013 model, using the 5-cycle test and averaging the 80% and 100% ranges.

BTW, I used the wrong numbers for the Tesla S MSRPs, taking them direct off the Tesla website which included the $7,500 tax credit. I've corrected the numbers in my earlier post, from $62,400-$72,400 to $69,900-$79,900, and redid the calcs.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

When did the EPA rating for the LEAF change?

2013 model, using the 5-cycle test and averaging the 80% and 100% ranges.

BTW, I used the wrong numbers for the Tesla S MSRPs, taking them direct off the Tesla website which included the $7,500 tax credit. I've corrected the numbers in my earlier post, from $62,400-$72,400 to $69,900-$79,900, and redid the calcs.

I guess my question had more to do with you taking the lower # for the LEAF/RAV and the higher numbers for the Tesla

 

[evnow]

Hi -

Judging by their recent statement, they are not "just fulfilling orders they got over several months/years.":

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318605/000119312513212354/d511008d10q.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
FORM 10-Q
Filing Date: 2013-05-10

We are currently receiving orders at a rate greater than 20,000 cars per year worldwide.

They are selling almost 2k cars per month in US now. That is 24k cars per year in the US alone. Obviously the order rate is much lower than this.

Your broad dismissiveness is noted as to the proposition as to whether people are willing to pay more for more kWh. As to the 2013 RAV4 EV situation, it is I think a poor idea to draw too many conclusions. Toyota has communicated clearly via its actions that it does not intend for the 2013 RAV4 EV to become a true production vehicle and the vehicle certainly has not been made widely available in all of the same ways that something like a 2013 Toyota gasoline vehicle has been.

People who demand higher mileage on Leaf usually wants it cheaper as well. Despite S's success, there is no proof that people will be willing to pay substantially more for a longer range Leaf. In any case this is all theoretical as we don't have a higher range Leaf.

I think on balance Rav4 EV proves that mid-market brands can't charge $50k for a higher range EV. When Infiniti LE comes out with a higher range, we will know how much people are willing to pay for a higher range (and a better brand).

 

[GRA]

When did the EPA rating for the LEAF change?

2013 model, using the 5-cycle test and averaging the 80% and 100% ranges.

BTW, I used the wrong numbers for the Tesla S MSRPs, taking them direct off the Tesla website which included the $7,500 tax credit. I've corrected the numbers in my earlier post, from $62,400-$72,400 to $69,900-$79,900, and redid the calcs.

I guess my question had more to do with you taking the lower # for the LEAF/RAV and the higher numbers for the Tesla

Only numbers I had. ISTR that the Tesla normal and extended range modes are based on 90%/100% rather than 80%/100% that the Leaf uses. Nor am I sure whether the Tesla's 60 and 85kWh are usable or max, which is why I put a ? in those spaces. Does anyone have both values?

Personally, I equate a 100 mile EPA range with one hour at 70 mph plus a 10 mile emergency reserve at the same speed plus some allowance for adverse conditions, HVAC use and degradation. I'd prefer the 100 mile range be based on a 'normal' range charge, i.e. 80 or 90% depending on the manufacturer, to more accurately reflect what you could get from a QC. And the EPA does need to standardize these tests across manufacturers.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

would it not be easier to assign the LEAF the 84 miles for the full range and the 124?? for the RAV?

 

[GRA]

would it not be easier to assign the LEAF the 84 miles for the full range and the 124?? for the RAV?

Different, not easier. I'll go back and include both values (IIRR it's 113 for the RAV4), but have to run now, so it'll have to wait.

Edit: Done.

 

[TomT]

If it is only 6 Kwh more and still no TMS, I suspect not a whole lot more... I know I would not be interested under those circumstances...

When Infiniti LE comes out with a higher range, we will know how much people are willing to pay for a higher range (and a better brand).

 

[ydnas7]

And the EPA does need to standardize these tests across manufacturers.

I suspect the outcome would be detrimental. Or at least, less flexibility in how a car operates. Manufacturers tend to optimize for the sticker. In addition to charging SOC range, there is also driving mode ranges, and they also vary between cars.

The FEGuide xls is back online with 2013 LEAF http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/download.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

All else being equal, if the LEAF had its SOC range locked to 90%, instead of offering 80% & 100%, i think a single SOC range LEAF would be less useful and less desirable.

 

[jlsoaz]

Hi -

Judging by their recent statement, they are not "just fulfilling orders they got over several months/years.":

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1318605/000119312513212354/d511008d10q.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
FORM 10-Q
Filing Date: 2013-05-10

We are currently receiving orders at a rate greater than 20,000 cars per year worldwide.

They are selling almost 2k cars per month in US now. That is 24k cars per year in the US alone. Obviously the order rate is much lower than this.

hi -
Tesla I believe is saying they will not be selling 24k vehicles in the US this year. In your previous post, you pointed this out yourself with one issue being that at some point they will be sending vehicles to Europe and Asia. Another issue is that they do not appear at present to have the production capacity to deliver 24k US vehicles and several thousand more Europe and Asian deliveries.

I think the basic math is that the company was shooting for creating Model S production capacity of 20,000 vehicles per year, and they have achieved approximately that capacity and apparently from initial indications with good quality. It sounds to me that in the end their actual present-day capacity may be a bit above 20,000, and that worldwide sales for 2013 will be a bit above 20,000 (i.e.: production is spoken for, for the moment). They did indeed have a backlog of orders with substantial deposits and have been working through that. When they say that they are getting in new orders on top of their existing orders at a rate of 20,000 per year (if they are accurately characterizing this order pace), what I take away from this is that the new orders are roughly equal to production capacity.

So, while it is the case that through several quarters they were working through a backlog of orders with paid deposits, it does not appear to be the case that once through that backlog they face a difficult near-term future based on a scarcity of fresh orders. It looks more like, at least in the near-term, going by their statements, they presently face some level of equilibrium of demand, production (supply capacity) and prices with new orders maybe (possibly) coming in just a bit below production capacity by a few percentage points, for the moment.

And: they appear to be profitable, at least by some measure. A lot of us have waited a decade or decades for a company to step up with that one.