Any knowledge at what point Nissan will repair/replace bat?

[cdherman]

I have read an awful lot, and the conclusion I seem to be coming to is that Nissan is keeping quiet about the exact point at which they will repair or replace the battery.

While one can safely assume that if the battery dies completely, through no fault of the owner, Nissan would honer their warranty if the vehicle is less than 8 yrs old and less than 100k, its entirely unclear to what would constitute a "failed" battery.

Are there any more knowledgeable answers out there? Is it possible that Nissan will view this on a case by case basis, with the decision being based somewhat on location, as well as evidence of the driving and charging habits of the owner?

Or do we think that eventually, a "bright line" will emerge, say 60% capacity or less, where Nissan will repair/replace the battery pack, under warranty?

For me, as I begin to settle into my charging and driving habits, it matters. If there is some confidence that the Nissan warranty really will set a lower limit, under which the battery will be repaired/replaced, then I would feel more confident pushing my charging/driving style. Alternatively, if its true that Nissan's warranty is only about as valuable as the paper its written on, then I had better get used to 80% charges and slow driving right from the beginning.

 

[mwalsh]

It's beginning to look like it will never get replaced for capacity loss. Never. So it would be best to get that idea out of your head. OK, maybe if the capacity loss is SUPER ABNORMAL, you might be able to badger them into doing the right thing. But chances are slim.

The only way you're getting a new pack under warranty is if performance of the motor is compromised - eg: you get in the car one morning and, while the car appears to be functioning normally out of your driveway, you can't get up to speed when driving away from home.

 

[Stoaty]

I think the answer is simple: if one of the cells fails (dramatic decrease in capacity compared to the other cells), it will be replaced under warranty. Otherwise, you are on your own... unless you can get enough media on your side to make the case publicly that Nissan should do something for the problems with your particular Leaf.

 

[TomT]

Which is why this is likely my last Nissan, be it EV or not.

It's beginning to look like it will never get replaced for capacity loss. Never. So it would be best to get that idea out of your head. OK, maybe if the capacity loss is SUPER ABNORMAL, you might be able to badger them into doing the right thing. But chances are slim.

 

[TonyWilliams]

Which is why this is likely my last Nissan, be it EV or not.

Go rent the Rav4 for a day... You won't be thinking about Nissan and their battery BS.

 

[GeekEV]

Which is why this is likely my last Nissan, be it EV or not.

Go rent the Rav4 for a day... You won't be thinking about Nissan and their battery BS.

Is that a good or bad thing?

EDIT: I just went and pursued the Rav4 EV thread. Sounds like you like it...

 

[KJD]

Which is why this is likely my last Nissan, be it EV or not.

Go rent the Rav4 for a day... You won't be thinking about Nissan and their battery BS.

I would love to rent one for a day, maybe even buy one next year. Too bad they only sell these on the west coast.

Please tell Toyota to sell this EV in all 50 states.

As far as Nissan replacing the battery pack under warranty. Good Luck with that one.

 

[cdherman]

Well, the reponses thus far seem to confirm my suspicions.

To think I had a Ford Focus EV on order, but was lured into the Leaf with the hefty discounts they are selling at. Stupid impatience.

I suppose there may emerge a market for used Leafs in cooler locals with moderate temps on the coasts. I will baby the battery and hope for the best.

 

[smkettner]

Looks like about no one will get a new battery under warranty.
I would not be surprized if the battery was finally available for retail sale in the next 12 to 24 months.

 

[Volusiano]

As far as I'm concerned, no battery replacement remedy = LOTS of people (me included) will never buy a LEAF again.

Even if Nissan has a solution later on, like better heat resistant battery or add in TMS or whatever, I will still not buy a Nissan again ever because they've lost my trust.

As long as there's another option comparable to the LEAF price-wise, battery-wise with TMS, I will always go with the other option.

 

[Herm]

I think this is a bit unfair.. Nissan was pretty clear that there is no capacity warranty from day one.. it is a wear item after all, just like tires some drivers will get a longer life than others.

If you live in Phoenix I can understand your pain with "actually measured" 15% loss in the first year. It would instantly kill Leaf sales if Nissan announced the real cost of replacing the batteries, they will have to heavily subsidize those replacement batteries and too much of that will wipe out any profit the Leaf will ever make.. so they are keeping quiet for now.

 

[cdherman]

I would think that the final outcome depends quite a bit on several factors as well:

-- Nissan specifies that is warranty does not cover "gradual capacity loss". Fine and good. But Nissan also made public statements early on about what gradual capacity loss they expected. I distictly recall reading about this many times and I assume that the origin of these gradual capacity loss estimates was none other than Nissan. If Nissan has not yet specifically stated that their earlier statements were eroneous, then Leaf's sold even today are under those assumptions.

-- Nissan is unlikely to issue a direct statement admitting that their original estimates of "gradual capacity loss" were false, as this would open them up immediately to legal action by existing aggrieved buyers.

-- If the number of units that suffer excessive (that is, more gradual loss than Nissan originally suggested would occur) loss is small, no class action lawsuit will emerge and Nissan will likely be able to sucessfully blame individual charging and driving behaviors. In fact, Nissan might be correct. There are many people who are doing well, with little loss of capacity.

-- However, if the number of units that suffer loss beyond what Nissan initially suggested is large, then I suspect it could easily devolve into a class action lawsuit. Just because they did not specify what gradual capacity loss is in the written warranty, does not mean they can hide behind that in all cases.

-- Finally, it also depends on the political winds in Washinton and the states. Republicans would like to snuff out product liability and performance law suits generally, and if they hold sway, the prospects also would get dimmer.

I amused (not really the right word) myself today in reading more and thinking more about this. I am not a lawyer, but I do possess a good bit of legal knowledge and experience. I suspect the end will not be apparent for several years, and may hinge on a lot of variables that are not yet clear.

Of course, in the meantime, it sure looks like driving and charging in a manner most conducive to battery life is prudent.

 

[mwalsh]

I think this is a bit unfair.. Nissan was pretty clear that there is no capacity warranty from day one.. it is a wear item after all, just like tires some drivers will get a longer life than others.

If you live in Phoenix I can understand your pain with "actually measured" 15% loss in the first year. It would instantly kill Leaf sales if Nissan announced the real cost of replacing the batteries, they will have to heavily subsidize those replacement batteries and too much of that will wipe out any profit the Leaf will ever make.. so they are keeping quiet for now.

Which brings us back to needing to know what happened in Phoenix. For many of us, before we can resume our role as cheerleader for the LEAF. :?

 

[Volusiano]

I think this is a bit unfair.. Nissan was pretty clear that there is no capacity warranty from day one.. it is a wear item after all, just like tires some drivers will get a longer life than others.

If you live in Phoenix I can understand your pain with "actually measured" 15% loss in the first year. It would instantly kill Leaf sales if Nissan announced the real cost of replacing the batteries, they will have to heavily subsidize those replacement batteries and too much of that will wipe out any profit the Leaf will ever make.. so they are keeping quiet for now.

Although there's no capacity warranty from day one, Nissan mislead the public from day 1 with their 80% after 5 years estimate. They also never said that the majority of the loss is up front and not toward the tail end.

So they need to make whole those people who experience 80% loss after 1 year. There are already 40 people just from this forum alone with 2 bar capacity loss reported as shown in Wiki. Who knows how many more are out there.

Although it is a wear item, giving out misleading wear information at the point of sales is deceptive if they come out a year later and change their story after the fact, all the while acting like they've known all along anyway. And still not changing their sales practices in hot states like Phoenix.

The point is not about capacity warranty. The point is about deceiving customers at the point of sales with optimistic figures and then don't bother to make them whole later on after the cat is out of the bag.

I'm not sure why you're worried about Nissan's profit on the LEAF being wiped out. If the effect is only on a very small amount of cars like they claim it to be, the cost of making whole on only the affected owners of this small amount of cars would be still far less than the effect of losing future sales because of the far reaching negative publicity.

Once Nissan shows that they don't have their customers' back, even unaffected customers also get a bad taste in the mouth.

Their profit is wiped out if and only if the effect is on a very large amount of LEAFs. But wait a minute, they're claiming that the majority of LEAFs are NOT affected by the problem, right? So what are they (and you) worried about?

 

[mwalsh]

Although there's no capacity warranty from day one, Nissan mislead the public from day 1 with their 80% after 5 years estimate. They also never said that the majority of the loss is up front and not toward the tail end.

That's not completely fair. Nissan probably shouldn't be held liable for the end-users lack of understanding whenit comes to how a Li-ion battery pack has traditionally degraded. Anyone who did their homework could have found oHathor themselves that the biggest losses were up-front. But Nissan did themselves a real disservice by not establishng a realistc set of customer expectations.

Nissan also, apparently, try to mask these losses from the masses by having unreported capacity at the top of the pack. This lulled many of us (with Gidometers) into a real false sense of security. And when we did eventually start to see apparent capacity loss, it caught us by surprise and made us very anxious.

There are definitely lessons to be learned here. But I'm not sure we're seeing Nissan learn them.

 

[Volusiano]

Although there's no capacity warranty from day one, Nissan mislead the public from day 1 with their 80% after 5 years estimate. They also never said that the majority of the loss is up front and not toward the tail end.

That's not completely fair. Nissan probably shouldn't be held liable for the end-users lack of understanding whenit comes to how a Li-ion battery pack has traditionally degraded. Anyone who did their homework could have found out for themselves that the biggest losses were up-front. But Nissan did themselves a real disservice by not establishing a realistic set of customer expectations.

Nissan also, apparently, try to mask these losses from the masses by having unreported capacity at the top of the pack. This lulled many of us (with Gidometers) into a real false sense of security. And when we did eventually start to see apparent capacity loss, it caught us by surprise and made us very anxious.

There are definitely lessons to be learned here. But I'm not sure we're seeing Nissan learn them.

I totally disagree with you that buyers should have to do such detailed enough homework to learn enough that the big capacity losses were up front. Buyers don't have to become the battery expert before buying the car. That's what Nissan is for. Buyers should be able to rely on Nissan as the battery expert to disclose to them at the point of sales in an honest and non-deceptive way that the big capacity loss will be up front and not the tail end. All Nissan had to do is to include that information up front at the point of sales. Not wait until the cat is out of the bag a year later then say "Oh yeah, by the way, the big losses are up front". Nissan knew full well that if that had been disclosed up front at the point of sales, the purchase decision would have had a much different turn out.

Just the fact that Nissan programmed the first bar of capacity loss to cover 15% and the rest 6.25% and not even mention that in the owners manual, but only in the service manual (which they later pulled out?) implies deceptive practice right there, because standard expectation of linearity of the read-out is exploited to mask this truth. The deception is premeditated and built-in right into the instrumentation reading before your eyes.

How do you expect owners to be able to research and discover that deception before they buy? Sure now, after the cat is out of the bag and it's all over the internet. But early adopters had no way to know that Nissan built 15% loss in the first bar, at least not before they buy the car and also buy the service manual, since the owners manual says nothing of the sort.

When you buy gasoline for your ICE car, do you research on your own to become a gasoline expert to see what's in the gasoline at your particular gas station? Or do you expect the vendor to disclose to you truthfully what's in it? How many percent is gas and how many percent is ethanol or any other additives?

 

[DaveEV]

I totally disagree with you that buyers should have to do such detailed enough homework to learn enough that the big capacity losses were up front. Buyers don't have to become the battery expert before buying the car. That's what Nissan is for. Buyers should be able to rely on Nissan as the battery expert to disclose to them at the point of sales in an honest and non-deceptive way that the big capacity loss will be up front and not the tail end. All Nissan had to do is to include that information up front at the point of sales. Not wait until the cat is out of the bag a year later then say "Oh yeah, by the way, the big losses are up front". Nissan knew full well that if that had been disclosed up front at the point of sales, the purchase decision would have had a much different turn out.

+1.

Here's what I want to see - give 3-4 different cities which covers the range of climates. At a minimum - Seattle, Los Angeles and Phoenix for best/avg/worst case scenarios.

Show us expected degradation if a customer follows a particular pattern - say commute 25 mi/day and 10k mi/year - has a charge timer set with an end time of 5am.

Show us how the capacity loss will vary depending on regular 80% vs 100% charges and frequency of QC use. Not looking for exact measures - here - show us the margin of error.

 

[ericsf]

I totally disagree with you that buyers should have to do such detailed enough homework to learn enough that the big capacity losses were up front. Buyers don't have to become the battery expert before buying the car. That's what Nissan is for. Buyers should be able to rely on Nissan as the battery expert to disclose to them at the point of sales in an honest and non-deceptive way that the big capacity loss will be up front and not the tail end. All Nissan had to do is to include that information up front at the point of sales. Not wait until the cat is out of the bag a year later then say "Oh yeah, by the way, the big losses are up front". Nissan knew full well that if that had been disclosed up front at the point of sales, the purchase decision would have had a much different turn out.

+1.

Here's what I want to see - give 3-4 different cities which covers the range of climates. At a minimum - Seattle, Los Angeles and Phoenix for best/avg/worst case scenarios.

Show us expected degradation if a customer follows a particular pattern - say commute 25 mi/day and 10k mi/year - has a charge timer set with an end time of 5am.

Show us how the capacity loss will vary depending on regular 80% vs 100% charges and frequency of QC use. Not looking for exact measures - here - show us the margin of error.

This is data which gives Nissan an edge for building future EVs compared to all their competitors who stayed on the sideline. I believe that if they were giving it away it would mean that they are giving up on EVs. And if that was the case we can kiss goodbye any chance of getting battery pack replacement from them.

 

[SteveInSeattle]

Very simple answer: If your battery does not have the power to propel your car, your battery will be replaced.

If it can propel your car at full power, but only for a few miles, it will not be replaced.

 

[cdherman]

Very simple answer: If your battery does not have the power to propel your car, your battery will be replaced.

If it can propel your car at full power, but only for a few miles, it will not be replaced.

I hesitate to even ask, but on what basis do you come to this conclusion?