2016 Nissan LEAF Information - 30 kWh SV/SL, 24 kWh S

[DaveEV]

Yep, as previously stated, Chemistry yes, capacity definitely no...

Chemistry = capacity. You can pretty much guarantee that if Nissan ships two different size packs for 2016, they will be in the same packaging as the current pack. There's no way they'd change packaging for a single model year. Doesn't really matter for me since it's looking increasingly unlikely that I'll lose 4 bars by next year unless I put the car into taxi service in Arizona or Palm Springs this summer.

By the way, it is a long story how it all came about, but I am pick up my car with a warranty new battery today and the parts list shows it is an F revision...

Well, spill the beans already!

As few MNL members have said all along, Nissan is not in business of selling batteries. They're in business of pushing metal.

Nissan picked up a lot of new customers with the LEAF. And unfortunately they've alienated a large number of them who no longer want anything to do with Nissan thanks to their bungled cool-weather battery chemistry and then further insulted them by providing a warranty only under threat of class action and insulted them again by making the warranty trigger at well under 70% capacity remaining and not offering any sort of pro-rated warranty which will inevitably leave a lot of customers in their biggest market SOL. Offering a capacity upgrade to the LEAF is Nissan's only move left. It's also the only way to help maintain the value of used LEAFs and thus the residual value of lease returns.

 

[TomT]

+1!

Nissan picked up a lot of new customers with the LEAF. And unfortunately they've alienated a large number of them who no longer want anything to do with Nissan thanks to their bungled cool-weather battery chemistry and then further insulted them by providing a warranty only under threat of class action and insulted them again by making the warranty trigger at well under 70% capacity remaining and not offering any sort of pro-rated warranty which will inevitably leave a lot of customers in their biggest market SOL.

 

[minispeed]

Remember when Tesla Model S was "300 mile" car for $49,900? Just not at the same time !!!

That's what Model 3 will be:

$35k - 40-50kWh battery (like RAV4 EV), range EPA 150, no Supercharger.

$55k - 55- 65kWh battery (like 208 -240 mile range Model S), AWD, Supercharger, EPA 200

$70k - P3-70D ++, bye bye BMW M3 !!!

BMW pricing:

$35k - base BMW 3 series

$40k - $50k - actual price paid with options

$62k - M3 without options

I think if we see a 150 mile car it will be released after and sub $35k, maybe when the credits run out. I'd like to see it with no supercharging as it would be wasteful for me to buy anything more than a 150 mile EV on a second car and I'd never use supercharging on a second car either.

To the one who says that nissan is in business of pushing metal:

A) Battery is mostly metal.

B) A low maintenance, reusable car is a marketing model for increasing sales and obtaining market dominance.

I truly believe that there will be up to 40kWh upgrades to all Leafs, because the form factor hasn't changed and Nissan has to support them for 10 more years. They aren't going to stock 50,000+ old battery packs to last 10 years. I can see them maybe stocking 5000 packs and then when they are about to use them up, reassessing and consider making more, especially if more people need them than they anticipated.

If Nisan sticks with the same 2P form factor for a while, they likely aren't going to give a replacement pack that only has 24kWh unless it is limited. You can't just take away capacity (volume) with higher energy dense cells unless the power density makes up for it. We are pretty much guaranteed a vastly better pack than the original with respect to longevity, it is the only thing that makes logical sense.

Nissan knows they owe it to us. Carl ghosn or whatever is friends with Elon and I'm sure he wouldn't let us down, right...? haha

I've thought about it, I'd want it but it's wishfull thinking. They won't need to stock anywhere near 50,000 batteries to support them. They stock a few and can re build them from cases as they get swapped out. If the lizard pack is everything they've promised they won't need to replace nearly as many under warrantee. For non warrantee packs who says they even have to supply a full pack to satisfy 10 years of support for the car. They would probably only need to supply cells (and refurbished would probably count too).

As for your point B I'll agree re-usable is better but they can market it just as well with low maintenance, lasts longer than the original buyer will need and "recyclable" to get just as much green cred from the majority of new car buyers.

Nissan picked up a lot of new customers with the LEAF.

70,000 over 5 years isn't a lot of new customers. We also don't know how many of those were long time Nissan customers and went with a leaf because it's a Nissan.

Some of the popular midsize cars have 200,000+ a year sales. They can lose every one of us as a repeat customer and still have a market large enough to make lots of money if the second car is good enough.

 

[ishiyakazuo]

Yep, as previously stated, Chemistry yes, capacity definitely no...

Chemistry = capacity. You can pretty much guarantee that if Nissan ships two different size packs for 2016, they will be in the same packaging as the current pack. There's no way they'd change packaging for a single model year.

Are you telling me that you can't envision them filling 1/5 of the packaging with plastic slugs? Because I sure can. It's almost certainly cheaper to take thinner cells that meet their capacity requirements and fill the rest of the casing with something else that costs next to nothing. 48 sheets of plastic (1 per module) isn't going to cost them much of anything. So, no, chemistry does not equal capacity when you're making a bunch of these things.

 

[Nubo]

...
2016 LEAF trim levels will break down as follows:

S 24kWh
SV 30kWh
SL 30kWh

Available Exterior Colors:

Forged Bronze
Brilliant Silver
Glacier White
Gun Metallic
Coulis Red
Deep Blue Pearl
Super Black
Pearl White
...

I kind of surprised myself while reading this, when I realized I was more excited by the new colors than the 30kWh pack.

 

[desiv]

...
Available Exterior Colors:

Forged Bronze
Brilliant Silver
Glacier White
Gun Metallic
Coulis Red
Deep Blue Pearl
Super Black
Pearl White
...

I kind of surprised myself while reading this, when I realized I was more excited by the new colors than the 30kWh pack.

Yep..
Wait, what?
Still no green for an EV???? Really?? ;-)
My wife is hoping for a nice darker forest green of some shade.. ;-)

Actually, one nice thing about Nissan sticking with a 24kWh pack, is that it will keep the resale value of the original Leafs from dropping even more as a result of bigger packs on the base model.. If they are still actively selling that size pack, it won't seem quite as OLD to a prospective buyer.. ;-)

desiv

 

[TomT]

Yep, the difference between 24 and 30 would make very little practical difference for me... It is just not enough of an increase allow me to significantly change my usage of the vehicle... I either don't need that much or I need more. It would make more of a difference well down the line with battery degradation...

I kind of surprised myself while reading this, when I realized I was more excited by the new colors than the 30kWh pack.

 

[minispeed]

Yep, the difference between 24 and 30 would make very little practical difference for me... It is just not enough of an increase allow me to significantly change my usage of the vehicle... I either don't need that much or I need more. It would make more of a difference well down the line with battery degradation...

I kind of surprised myself while reading this, when I realized I was more excited by the new colors than the 30kWh pack.

That would be the perfect fit for my wife, 55 miles round trip in winter without ever having to look at the gauge, conserve heat or go below the speed limit. For me it would mean less QC in the winter as my 10hr at L1 would now be enough for 90 miles round trip.

Another possibility is this may be 6kWh in the trunk on top of the existing 24kWh pack and may be a way for them to test out that many cells pre leaf 2 which may then fit the same 30 kWh under the floor in a longer wider platform. Although 30 kWh in a leaf 2 even with a weight drop and an aero gain I doubt that would get up to 150 EPA. I know this is a long shot and probably not the way it's happening.

 

[evnow]

Another possibility is this may be 6kWh in the trunk on top of the existing 24kWh pack and may be a way for them to test out that many cells pre leaf 2 which may then fit the same 30 kWh under the floor in a longer wider platform. Although 30 kWh in a leaf 2 even with a weight drop and an aero gain I doubt that would get up to 150 EPA. I know this is a long shot and probably not the way it's happening.

While 6kWh in the trunk may happen - definitely Gen 2 is not coming with just 30 kWh. If it did, I'd call it DOA - and Nissan slipping to an also ran in the EV race. They have to double the range - even if they don't hit 200 miles in MY17.

They should also plan on more frequent battery capacity updates than they have been doing - just to be in the race.

 

[minispeed]

Another possibility is this may be 6kWh in the trunk on top of the existing 24kWh pack and may be a way for them to test out that many cells pre leaf 2 which may then fit the same 30 kWh under the floor in a longer wider platform. Although 30 kWh in a leaf 2 even with a weight drop and an aero gain I doubt that would get up to 150 EPA. I know this is a long shot and probably not the way it's happening.

While 6kWh in the trunk may happen - definitely Gen 2 is not coming with just 30 kWh. If it did, I'd call it DOA - and Nissan slipping to an also ran in the EV race. They have to double the range - even if they don't hit 200 miles in MY17.

They should also plan on more frequent battery capacity updates than they have been doing - just to be in the race.

Leaf 2 S could come with just 30kWh if these 2016 24/30 rumours are true then a leaf 2 30/38 may happen. If the Tesla 40 got 139 with around 4300 lb and good aero a lighter leaf with similar aero could do 150.

 

[evnow]

Leaf 2 S could come with just 30kWh if these 2016 24/30 rumours are true then a leaf 2 30/38 may happen. If the Tesla 40 got 139 with around 4300 lb and good aero a lighter leaf with similar aero could do 150.

If 30 kWh gets barely above 100, 38 won't get us 150. We get about 4 miles per useable kWh. So, 150 needs 38 kWh useable - or 45 kWh or so total.

I think we'll get at least 48, if not higher as an option in Gen 2.

Model 3 will probably have 55 or 60 kWh. Bolt should too. No reason for Nissan Leaf 2 to not have that much battery - even if it meant getting the pack from LG (if their own battery isn't dense enough).

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

There's usable and then there's usable. When you factor in range anxiety a gen 1 has a usable capacity of 12-15kwh, so adding 6kwh is like a 50% increase, if you believe that the "safety margin" is an absolute number and it only has to be paid for once.

How the psychology plays is another question. Do drivers become concerned when the SOC drops to a certain percentage, or when it drops to a certain number of miles remaining... if the latter, does the concern start at a higher number of miles remaining if the estimated miles on a full charge was higher?

 

[asimba2]

The Tesla roadster battery upgrade added 31% capacity in the same footprint via improved chemistry change. If Nissan used 31% more efficient cells it would result in a 31.5 kWh battery in the same packaging. If that is what we are seeing here (30 kWh) and is made available in a 2016 Leaf, I would imagine it would be backwards compatible with older models. Although I'm not sure how adaptable the BMS is to changes in capacity.

 

[GRA]

There's usable and then there's usable. When you factor in range anxiety a gen 1 has a usable capacity of 12-15kwh, so adding 6kwh is like a 50% increase, if you believe that the "safety margin" is an absolute number and it only has to be paid for once.

How the psychology plays is another question. Do drivers become concerned when the SOC drops to a certain percentage, or when it drops to a certain number of miles remaining... if the latter, does the concern start at a higher number of miles remaining if the estimated miles on a full charge was higher?

I imagine it differes from person to person. Personally, I want a minimum of 10% reserve, rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5 miles, but I'd prefer more in inclement conditions where I may need to detour, or sit stuck with the heater on. I consider the cars capable of a real-world, no worries year-round range over 3-5 years about 50% of their EPA range, at least in a temperate climate like the Bay Area. For colder climates, maybe 40%.

 

[pkulak]

The Tesla roadster battery upgrade added 31% capacity in the same footprint via improved chemistry change. If Nissan used 31% more efficient cells it would result in a 31.5 kWh battery in the same packaging. If that is what we are seeing here (30 kWh) and is made available in a 2016 Leaf, I would imagine it would be backwards compatible with older models. Although I'm not sure how adaptable the BMS is to changes in capacity.

Also keep in mind that the Roadster actually started out with pretty high-density cells. The Leaf has, presumably, had the same, pretty low-density cells since 2011. If Nissan just took the cells that KIA puts in the Soul, they could get over 40 kWh without making the pack larger at all.

 

[minispeed]

The Tesla roadster battery upgrade added 31% capacity in the same footprint via improved chemistry change. If Nissan used 31% more efficient cells it would result in a 31.5 kWh battery in the same packaging. If that is what we are seeing here (30 kWh) and is made available in a 2016 Leaf, I would imagine it would be backwards compatible with older models. Although I'm not sure how adaptable the BMS is to changes in capacity.

I'd put money on it not being backwards compatible, at least from Nissan. They probably don't want it to be backwards compatible so even if it can be they may program it so that it won't work. Yes maybe someone will figure out how to reprogram a new pack. On the off chance that Nissan will install one I bet they will price it sky high so trading in a car is a better choice. Since Tesla doesn't have a new roadster to sell people they benefit more by selling a new battery. Since they are also a new company with such small market share and no advertising they benefit a lot from making an announcement that they have a new battery even if they don't sell many.

There's usable and then there's usable. When you factor in range anxiety a gen 1 has a usable capacity of 12-15kwh, so adding 6kwh is like a 50% increase, if you believe that the "safety margin" is an absolute number and it only has to be paid for once.

How the psychology plays is another question. Do drivers become concerned when the SOC drops to a certain percentage, or when it drops to a certain number of miles remaining... if the latter, does the concern start at a higher number of miles remaining if the estimated miles on a full charge was higher?

I imagine it differes from person to person. Personally, I want a minimum of 10% reserve, rounded up to the nearest multiple of 5 miles. but I'd prefer more in inclement conditions where I may need to detour, or sit stuck with the heater on. I consider the cars capable of a real-world, no worries year-round range over 3-5 years about 50% of their EPA range, at least in a temperate climate like the Bay Area. For colder climates, maybe 40%.

Those needs also differ location to location. I have a cluster of free L2s that are almost never used around my route. My reserve is stopping. The last one is less than 5 miles from my house. The third closest (12 miles from home) is a Nissan dealer so in the winter during open hours there's free coffee, magazines, wifi and a tv inside with a comfy sofa.

Leaf 2 S could come with just 30kWh if these 2016 24/30 rumours are true then a leaf 2 30/38 may happen. If the Tesla 40 got 139 with around 4300 lb and good aero a lighter leaf with similar aero could do 150.

If 30 kWh gets barely above 100, 38 won't get us 150. We get about 4 miles per useable kWh. So, 150 needs 38 kWh useable - or 45 kWh or so total.

I think we'll get at least 48, if not higher as an option in Gen 2.

Model 3 will probably have 55 or 60 kWh. Bolt should too. No reason for Nissan Leaf 2 to not have that much battery - even if it meant getting the pack from LG (if their own battery isn't dense enough).

Yes but the 30kWh pack getting 100 miles is based on our current car with aero that sucks. Leaf 2 could benefit from weight loss, aero gain and although I didn't say it before tires like the i3s Bridgestone's would help too. Current range of 84miles with 22.4 usable means 3.75 m/kWh. A 38kWh pack with the same usable % would be 35.5kWh. To get an EPA 150 miles it needs to get 4.12 m/kWh. That can be done. To satisfy the claim that it's capable of going 200 miles it needs to be able to drive at 5.63 m/kWh on the easiest of the city tests. Since many people can drive their current leaf at 5.63 m/kWh+ around town it's pretty safe to say they can engineer a car that can do that on a 38kWh battery.

I probably didn't factor in that the 40 kWh Tesla probably had an actual 40 available to get that 139 since it was a limited 60 pack but it still has 1000lbs more than leaf 1 in it.

I doubt the bolt will show up with an EPA 200 mile range so it probably won't be in the 55+ kWh club. I've already heard that the claim is something along the lines of will be able to travel 200 miles on a charge. Similar to the leaf claims that it can go 100 miles on a charge, and we all know that it easily can.

 

[dgpcolorado]

...To satisfy the claim that it's capable of going 200 miles it needs to be able to drive at 5.63 m/kWh on the easiest of the city tests. Since many people can drive their current leaf at 5.63 m/kWh+ around town it's pretty safe to say they can engineer a car that can do that on a 38kWh battery...

200 miles EPA range? Not and still have a car that remotely approaches the size and utility of the current LEAF. It might be possible with a 50 kWh battery but 38 kWh? Come on!

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

Leaf 2 S could come with just 30kWh if these 2016 24/30 rumours are true then a leaf 2 30/38 may happen. If the Tesla 40 got 139 with around 4300 lb and good aero a lighter leaf with similar aero could do 150.

If 30 kWh gets barely above 100, 38 won't get us 150. We get about 4 miles per useable kWh. So, 150 needs 38 kWh useable - or 45 kWh or so total.

I think we'll get at least 48, if not higher as an option in Gen 2.

Model 3 will probably have 55 or 60 kWh. Bolt should too. No reason for Nissan Leaf 2 to not have that much battery - even if it meant getting the pack from LG (if their own battery isn't dense enough).

YMMV. As for me, I can AND WILL get 115 miles out of it EASILY at least initially. It will open up several dozen more locations I can do without stopping to charge including the imfamous EV hole aka Grays Harbor, WA (they actually do have one charger at a Chevy dealership of all places but as an L2, its usefulness is limited when a work schedule needs to be followed)

But this battery will also degrade so it still is not likely to meet my minimal buying need which is a challenging 85 mile range after 100,000 miles. Its close but not quite there

 

[evnow]

Yes but the 30kWh pack getting 100 miles is based on our current car with aero that sucks. Leaf 2 could benefit from weight loss, aero gain and although I didn't say it before tires like the i3s Bridgestone's would help too. Current range of 84miles with 22.4 usable means 3.75 m/kWh. A 38kWh pack with the same usable % would be 35.5kWh. To get an EPA 150 miles it needs to get 4.12 m/kWh. That can be done. To satisfy the claim that it's capable of going 200 miles it needs to be able to drive at 5.63 m/kWh on the easiest of the city tests. Since many people can drive their current leaf at 5.63 m/kWh+ around town it's pretty safe to say they can engineer a car that can do that on a 38kWh battery.

Not a question of whether they can - it is a question of whether they will.

Remember the changes in Leaf shape are to make it look aggressive - not for aero. All kinds of weight reduction strategies don't bring much in terms of range - as BMW i3 testifies. If you want to double the range, at a minimum you should double the battery capacity.

I doubt the bolt will show up with an EPA 200 mile range so it probably won't be in the 55+ kWh club. I've already heard that the claim is something along the lines of will be able to travel 200 miles on a charge. Similar to the leaf claims that it can go 100 miles on a charge, and we all know that it easily can.

From all indications they are talking 200+ EPA miles (remember the leaked info from a focus group study ?). The claims of 100 miles / 200 miles no longer holds water. It has been discredited quite a bit. Now people (including clueless journalists) look for EPA miles.

 

[minispeed]

...To satisfy the claim that it's capable of going 200 miles it needs to be able to drive at 5.63 m/kWh on the easiest of the city tests. Since many people can drive their current leaf at 5.63 m/kWh+ around town it's pretty safe to say they can engineer a car that can do that on a 38kWh battery...

200 miles EPA range? Not and still have a car that remotely approaches the size and utility of the current LEAF. It might be possible with a 50 kWh battery but 38 kWh? Come on!

"easiest of city tests" I didn't say it will get an EPA sticker (comparable to our current 84) of 200 with 38 kWh but that if they can get 150 then they will probably be able to get 200 on the easy city test, the same one the leaf already gets over 100 miles on. LA4 if I remember correctly? They can then use that to back up anything they have already said to show that it can do 200 miles the same way they did with previous 100 mile claims. Also I think GM will do the exact same thing. The only one I have any faith in in delivering an epa 200+ number is Tesla and it still wouldn't shock me if they get 19X.

Not a question of whether they can - it is a question of whether they will.

Remember the changes in Leaf shape are to make it look aggressive - not for aero. All kinds of weight reduction strategies don't bring much in terms of range - as BMW i3 testifies. If you want to double the range, at a minimum you should double the battery capacity.

From all indications they are talking 200+ EPA miles (remember the leaked info from a focus group study ?). The claims of 100 miles / 200 miles no longer holds water. It has been discredited quite a bit. Now people (including clueless journalists) look for EPA miles.

http://www.plugincars.com/battery-capacity-mercedes-ev-67-bigger-bmw-i3-129944.html

If they will, yes that is probably better to say. If weight loss doesn't give much in the way of range how come the MB B class sucks back so much juice, 28 kWh is what the Mercedes uses during the EPA test for 85 miles, i3 uses 18.8 kWh for 81 miles. I know not all of it is weight but it matters.



It's also one of the things (aero included) that matters for the extreme swings that customers experience like hard acceleration and fast speeds as well as winter range (cold dense air will affect a bad aero car more than a good one). It also makes all the other components easier and cheaper to make since they don't have to be as beefy to move/handle all that weight as well as boosting acceleration numbers that still matter to a lot of buyers.