You sort of made my point. At those numbers the credit begins to roll off in 2018, so if Tesla is late to the party with the model 3, and they likely will be if you look at their past history, then you'd only see about 6 months of the full credit, and about another 6-12 months with rolling off credits. This means that about 1.5 years after production starts, they have to account for a $7500 increase it the real price of the car. This is a much more important detail with the model 3 then the S or X because most people who can afford the S or X can also afford to buy one without the $7500 credit, but a $7500 credit on a $40,000 car is much more compelling.
2016 Nissan LEAF Information - 30 kWh SV/SL, 24 kWh S
- Thread starter bruddahmanmatt
- Start date
Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:
- Status
Sublime said:
That's exactly the kind of calculation I keep making as I try to decide [1] what makes sense for my wife and me, and [2] where the market's mindset is.
I agree that for a Leaf, i.e. a non-lux car, $3k/40 miles is about the right ratio in terms of what the market would find widely palatable. And as best I can tell, battery prices aren't quite there yet, even though they keep sliding in the right direction.
While I'm happy to see the bump in battery capacity for the 2016 SV/SL Leafs, I think the really interesting details are how the market responds to (and at a price we don't even hear rumors of yet) and then what Nissan does, partially in response to that market reaction, with the Leaf II. My prediction: The wait from this September until the Leaf II details leak will really, and I mean REALLY, test my patience. My wife should apply for sainthood now; she'll easily earn it in the next 18 months or so...
DaveinOlyWA
Well-known member
Bazooka said:
how about a dose of reality here? the reason Tesla sold more 85's has less to do with value than cost. How many of these 85 buyers would have bought another $75,000 car if Tesla was not here? Quite a few I am guessing. Now there were several that were previously in the "$50,000-$60,000" market that were willing to pony up the extra cash but only because the long term TCO benefit of EVs was obvious to them and it seems that ones with previous experiences with other highly efficient cars like the Prius got it much quicker. I still find it shocking to see how hard it is for very well educated people to see that.
Now the 85D really illustrates the buyers psyche here. Are we really thinking they picked the 85 or the 70 because of range? especially when a large percentage of these buyers were likely looking at high end $100,000 exotic cars? no. they got the 85 only because that is what they do. they don't look at the price, range, specs, etc.
they simply say "I want the best, when can it be delivered"
Nubo
Well-known member
kubel said:
But... look at the sales history. It started taking off in spring 2012. Lease returns will be following a similar curve. Up until now certain markets have been absorbing the cars but as the numbers escalate and people become more aware of the degraded packs, it's going to become harder and harder to move these vehicles, I think.
Maybe Nissan intentionally leaks stuff about battery packs before they announce official details, then reads this site and all of the other blogs to see how their existing owners would respond to various options and uses that to make a decision. If they don't do that, their stupid. We've already hashed out nearly all of their hypotheticals for them.
dgpcolorado
Well-known member
Musk has indicated that he is keenly aware of the well-earned reputation for delays in the S and X and that he intends to hold to the schedule for the Model 3: first look spring 2016, first deliveries late 2017, ramping up production in 2018. A lot of it depends on how well things go at the "Gigafactory" I would guess. You certainly have reason to be skeptical but I think that the Model 3 may well come out pretty close to the planned dates.tkdbrusco said:
That gets me to wondering what the LEAF schedule will be. Like others, I've been assuming that the 30 kWh 2016 LEAF is a brief interim upgrade and that LEAF 2 will be a 2017 model. But will it? Nissan is trying to get ahead of, or at least match, the competition for longer range BEVs. It remains to be seen whether that will be MY 2017 or 2018. The Tesla Model 3 will be a 2018 (I think). The Chevy Bolt is something of a mirage and seems likely to be little more than a compliance car (regardless of what GM says). Will they be produced in significant numbers for MY 2017? I doubt it.
Will Nissan wait until MY 2018 for LEAF 2 and just continue with the 30 kWh LEAF for 2017? [Assuming that the 30 kWh 2016 is "real", as seems to be the case.]
DaveinOlyWA
Well-known member
dgpcolorado said:
http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=426450#p426450" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
desiv
Well-known member
So, are you saying he didn't intend to hold to the schedule for the for the S and the X releases? ;-)dgpcolorado said:
We all know that he "intends" to do that..
What we're saying is, he intended to hold to dates before, and hasn't.
Until he starts holding to dates, some of us will believe it when we see it..
And I hope he does.. I just don't expect it.. ;-)
desiv
The first few 200mi sub $40K EVs will be in a war against supply, price, and government incentives. The whole government incentive thing leaves the market wide open for a new player to swoop in sometime late 2017 with a model that is competitive and has the full runway of 200,000 rebates to take advantage of. They could keep selling through 2019 with a significant price advantage on their competitors, assuming they could keep up with demand that is. I'm thinking someone like Honda, Mazda, or Hyundai. All of the sudden in 2018 Tesla, Nissan, and Chevy are out of full rebates and into the roll off category, and these two have 100,000+ cars they can sell at the full $7500. Heck, maybe it makes a compelling argument to share vehicle platforms with a competitor, sort of like what Ford and Mazda did in the 90s.
dgpcolorado
Well-known member
I'm making the assumption the Tesla can learn from mistakes and improve. Others can disagree if they wish; we will all find out in a few years.desiv said:
dgpcolorado
Well-known member
I expect the Tesla Model 3 to be severely supply-constrained for the first couple of years, regardless of tax credit status. My guess is that LEAF 2 will not be supply constrained after the first few months.tkdbrusco said:
The Tesla Model 3, if it meets specs and price, doesn't really have any competition from other manufacturers. It will be the only moderately priced BEV that can make long trips. The others, even if they have 200+ mile EPA range, will still be limited to local/regional use. For many buyers that may be good enough. For others, Supercharging makes a huge difference and the other BEVs aren't in the same league. Not even close.
Your thesis that other manufacturers can swoop in after the tax credit has expired for Tesla, Nissan, and Chevy, with similar cars that have a $7500 price advantage, has several flaws, in my view:
First, most car makers have been indifferent, or downright hostile, to EVs, for reasons much discussed here at MNL. They hate them, view them as threats to their lucrative ICEV business, and now they are going to go EV? Why?
Second, the manufacturers that have used up their tax credits will have learned a lot about building and marketing EVs. They should have some economies of scale by then, which the latecomers will not. It is true that the latecomers to the market could learn from the mistakes of the pioneers, but will they? That remains to be seen.
To me the Supercharger network is the #1 reason I would by a Tesla over the other manufacturers. The question is, whether or not that network will be so overstrained with the cars on the road that it is still viable for long range travel? If you have to wait an hour to get a plug due to all of the Teslas on the road, then there is no advantage.
dgpcolorado
Well-known member
Where I live, it simply isn't an issue. In densely populated California? Perhaps. My impression is that Tesla is rapidly expanding heavily used Supercharger locations and they certainly know which ones get the use.tkdbrusco said:
It is worth noting that even with a Tesla the vast majority of charging will be done at home or a destination, so it isn't as if a million cars will be using the Superchargers every day even when there are a million on the road. Some Superchargers located too close to population centers may become overused by people looking for a free charge. But Superchargers away from population centers should get used only by the small proportion of cars on a road trip on that particular route. And those are the ones usually needed for a long trip. I'm assuming that Supercharger station status will be part of the nav system soon, if it isn't already.
evnow
Well-known member
May be another fork of the thread ? The comments are interesting, but OT.
GetOffYourGas
Well-known member
KJD said:
With how hard people had to fight for the warranty we have, I would say zero.
dgpcolorado
Well-known member
I agree.GetOffYourGas said:
TimLee
Well-known member
Nissan clearly listened to the early LEAF adopters at the meeting at Google in late 2011 and incorporated a lot of that in the 2013.tkdbrusco said:
But if the September or October 2015 availability of the 2016 LEAF is correct there just isn't enough time for this to be a trial balloon.
The media "leaks" two years ago may have been a trial balloon, but very unlikely this is.
GRA
Well-known member
OTOH, IIRR they now have at least three competitors who have better capacity warranties than they do, so they may be forced to improve the warranty regardless of what they'd like to do. All depends on how sales go, but they no longer have the monopoly on 'affordable' BEVs that they had early on. If sales of one or more of the better-warrantied competitors take(s) off and their own lag (and that's a major part of the reason, or they think it is), what choice will they have? They can try dropping the price, but if people place a higher value on long-term security than initial price, they'll have to compete either by offering an extended capacity warranty as an extra-cost option, or including it on all cars.dgpcolorado said:
walterbays
Well-known member
Or they could have another try at the model where you buy the car and lease the battery which, like a true capacity warranty, assigns the risk of quickly degrading batteries to Nissan.GRA said:
Some cars like Volt historically have shown very low battery degradation, whether due to superior chemistry, superior electrolyte construction, superior BMS software, active cooling, reservation of more spare capacity, or some combination of those factors. These cars I would trust without a true (pro-rata) battery warranty.
For a car like Leaf with history of rapid degradation in most climates, if Nissan refuses to offer a true warranty I must assume that's because they have analyzed their wealth of test and real-world use data, and determined there is unacceptably high risk of rapid degradation and so they will not assume that financial risk. In that case, neither will I.
If Consumer Reports analyzes reader data on 3-4 years experience with 2015+ model year cars, and that shows that those batteries are reliable, then I will trust Nissan again with or without a true warranty. However if that happens it will mean that Nissan was overly conservative. With their superior mass of data they could have known 3-4 years earlier that they would have faced negligible financial risk from offering a true warranty, and as a result could have had higher vehicle sales in the interim.
- Status
