Capacity Loss on 2011-2012 LEAFs

[surfingslovak]

now, everything i said goes for me. for different people, different needs so i get it and my post was for my situation.

Precisely, and that was my point too. If you lived in a different climate (cold or hot) or in a place with fewer CHAdeMO chargers, your priorities might be different too. Although I empathize with the pure EV sentiment echoed by many here, I'm trying to be pragmatic about it. As already mentioned, I nearly bought a Volt a year ago. I even got a trade-in quote on my LEAF from a GM dealer. I believe that the Volt is well-engineered and I'm glad that it's out there. If it wasn't, the EV community in Phoenix would have fewer viable choices. The Volt is more likely to last in that climate than the LEAF, and we have yet to hear someone complain about EV range reduction. It's also interesting that a number of LEAF owners purchased a Volt later, and vice versa. You will see a number of familiar nicknames when you go to gm-volt.com. That said, if I don't get the i3 after the ActiveE lease is over, I will likely end up with a RAV4 EV or a Model S 60 kWh. I'm waiting to learn more about the Infinity LE as well. For the i3, I'm heavily leaning towards the range-extended trim.

 

[Volusiano]

ok, please correct me if i am wrong but are not arbitration people 3rd party?

in EVERY arbitration case I have been involved with, a 3rd party determined damages, payout, etc. After Nissan agrees to the buyback, i believe that ends their role.

so maybe that is the reason each chooses a different method to determine value on buyback?

ed; it is ok for Vol to thank Nissan and still be unhappy with the settlement because they are two different entities here or is this whole post based on an incorrect assumption because if it is, then Nissan has effectively redefined the word

I'm pretty sure that these guys work for Nissan and are not third party arbitrators. Below is their official title in the buyback offer letter. Also their telephone number has the Tennessee area code.

Arbitration Specialist
Dispute Resolution Programs
Nissan North America, Inc.

The only time I can see when there'd be a third party arbitrator is when there's a third party involved. But the buyback transaction (at least mine) is conducted with 2 parties only, me and Nissan. I never had to file a BBB complaint myself. Neither did Leafkabob. So I'm pretty sure that his arbitration specialist is a Nissan employee as well.

One other thing different between Leafkabob's case and mine is that he was required to bring his LEAF in for testing before they agreed to his buyback. They didn't even asked me to bring my LEAF into a dealership for testing or anything like that at all. I've heard of others in the earlier phases who said they were asked to bring their cars in for testing. But maybe by now, Nissan decided it was pointless to do that anymore, maybe because they have enough data collected to know better now.

 

[Volusiano]

...I never mentioned about how Nissan handles the tax credit because Nissan doesn't handle the tax credit. If you haven't already figured it out yet, it's still OTD price minus the Use Allowance minus your investment in aftermarket add-ons. Like I said before.

If you're implying that for people with very low mileage (translating to low Use Allowance) and no market add-ons, they may end up making money and not lose any if the $7500 tax credit is factored in, then it's true. There's nothing vague about that. But don't forget that not everybody qualifies for the full $7500 tax credit either. So the vagueness is not on purpose to hide anything. The vagueness is because all individual situations are different. And there's no way Nissan can factor in the tax credit into the buyback because not everybody gets the full tax credit.

In my case, I didn't make any money and I lost several grands after all is said and done...

If I understand you correctly, I would not describe your ownership experience as having “lost several grands”.

You (apparently) drove a new car for many months and many thousands of miles, at as cost far below what you would have had to pay for similar use of any other new car, and far less than those of us who are satisfied with our LEAFs (so far) have had to pay.

It sounds like Lessees may not get such a sweet deal, if they pursue early termination.

I agree with you about all this. I only said I "lost several grands" within the context of that post, where I said that others who had low mileage at the time of their buyback and no third party add-ons to their LEAF may stand to "make money" with their buyback, assuming that they get the full $7500 tax credit and the Use Allowance was calculated out to be less than $7500. WITHIN THAT CONTEXT, I said that I "lost" several grands -> as opposed to some people who might have gained money in the transaction. That's all. You shouldn't read too much more into it than that.

So you're correct that for some people who got their buyback, it may turn out to be a sweet deal for them, having been able to use the car for nothing, and even possibly made some money. In my case, I didn't "make" money like some people might have, but even so, the money that I "lost" was still not too bad because I did get good use out of that car. So it kind of even'ed out for me. It's just like saying I bought car X and when I sold it, I lost Y dollars, but of course the Y dollars are money spent for using the car, not just plain money lost without getting any used of the car, that's all.

And I agree that people who purchased the car probably MAY end up getting a sweeter deal than people who leased the car. Obviously Nissan pocketed the tax credit on leases, but owners pocketed the tax credit on purchases. But like anything, it's not like anybody planned any of this, so whatever the end result happens to be is not due to any scheming from anybody. So for people who ended up more lucky out of the transaction than others, it's just their stroke of luck and they shouldn't being blamed for being lucky either.

 

[leafkabob]

ok, please correct me if i am wrong but are not arbitration people 3rd party?

in EVERY arbitration case I have been involved with, a 3rd party determined damages, payout, etc. After Nissan agrees to the buyback, i believe that ends their role.

so maybe that is the reason each chooses a different method to determine value on buyback?

ed; it is ok for Vol to thank Nissan and still be unhappy with the settlement because they are two different entities here or is this whole post based on an incorrect assumption because if it is, then Nissan has effectively redefined the word

I'm pretty sure that these guys work for Nissan and are not third party arbitrators. Below is their official title in the buyback offer letter. Also their telephone number has the Tennessee area code.

Arbitration Specialist
Dispute Resolution Programs
Nissan North America, Inc.

The only time I can see when there'd be a third party arbitrator is when there's a third party involved. But the buyback transaction (at least mine) is conducted with 2 parties only, me and Nissan. I never had to file a BBB complaint myself. Neither did Leafkabob. So I'm pretty sure that his arbitration specialist is a Nissan employee as well.

One other thing different between Leafkabob's case and mine is that he was required to bring his LEAF in for testing before they agreed to his buyback. They didn't even asked me to bring my LEAF into a dealership for testing or anything like that at all. I've heard of others in the earlier phases who said they were asked to bring their cars in for testing. But maybe by now, Nissan decided it was pointless to do that anymore, maybe because they have enough data collected to know better now.

There is no "arbitration" involved in these buybacks. Neither is there any negotiation. The Nissan employees who are handling the buybacks are called Arbitration Specialists, probably because when there is a real arbitration they are Nissan's rep during that process. But they aren't the arbitrators. That is probably the BBB, although I'm guessing.

Seems to me that several folks have completely missed Volusiano's point, which is that Nissan doesn't have a single way of calculating the mileage offset, resulting in one person paying a relatively low amount to offset the miles driven and another person paying quite a bit more because a different formula is used. In his case it resulted in his getting about $1,000 less than he would have received had the used the formula they used with me. I don't understand why they can't use one formula.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

interesting. so if these "arbitrators" are Nissan employees, the question of why different methods are employed to determine compensation is very much unanswered.

maybe anyone who has done a buy back should post time of ownership and mileage. (what you were paid is not necessary) to see if the method is based on THAT variable

 

[DesertDenizen]

interesting. so if these "arbitrators" are Nissan employees, the question of why different methods are employed to determine compensation is very much unanswered.

maybe anyone who has done a buy back should post time of ownership and mileage. (what you were paid is not necessary) to see if the method is based on THAT variable

I did not get a buyback. After filing with BBB, (one bar loss at only 6771 miles of 5 star driving and charging habits, 14 months of ownership), an arbitration specialist contacted me. I said I would have leased, and not purchased, if I had known this would happen so getting a lease would satisfy me. NNA contacted the dealer and had them offer me a VVP (?) price on a 2012 that I could lease. (I forget the acronym, it is the price they offer to Nissan employees.) I was still not happy with the deal. NNA intervened directly with the dealer, (two people at the dealer said this has never happened in their 20 years at the dealer). NNA sweetened the terms of the trade in amount, enough to satisfy me and get me my lease. Not as good as a buyback, but I am a compromising kind of guy. All the yoga I think.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

interesting. so if these "arbitrators" are Nissan employees, the question of why different methods are employed to determine compensation is very much unanswered.

maybe anyone who has done a buy back should post time of ownership and mileage. (what you were paid is not necessary) to see if the method is based on THAT variable

I did not get a buyback. After filing with BBB, (one bar loss at only 6771 miles of 5 star driving and charging habits, 14 months of ownership), an arbitration specialist contacted me. I said I would have leased, and not purchased, if I had known this would happen so getting a lease would satisfy me. NNA contacted the dealer and had them offer me a VVP (?) price on a 2012 that I could lease. (I forget the acronym, it is the price they offer to Nissan employees.) I was still not happy with the deal. NNA intervened directly with the dealer, (two people at the dealer said this has never happened in their 20 years at the dealer). NNA sweetened the terms of the trade in amount, enough to satisfy me and get me my lease. Not as good as a buyback, but I am a compromising kind of guy. All the yoga I think.

definitely the route I would have taken. I really dont see any other EV on the market today that would work as well for me in my budget range. Leasing every 2 years at a decent rate would be cheaper than buying in the long run anyway. now you dont have to worry about battery costs.

 

[surfingslovak]

definitely the route I would have taken. I really dont see any other EV on the market today that would work as well for me in my budget range. Leasing every 2 years at a decent rate would be cheaper than buying in the long run anyway. now you dont have to worry about battery costs.

I think everyone knows what's best for them, given their particular situation. I just wish that Nissan would make this option more easily accessible to affected owners, who wish to pursue a lease conversion.

 

[JPWhite]

Came across an interesting segment on a recent EVTV episode by our friend Jack Ricard. He claims heat is GOOD for Lithium Ion batteries. They last longer!!

http://youtu.be/175PEdeubSU?t=40m9s

Try telling that to LEAF owners in Pheonix.

 

[surfingslovak]

Came across an interesting segment on a recent EVTV episode by our friend Jack Ricard. He claims heat is GOOD for Lithium Ion batteries. They last longer!!

http://youtu.be/175PEdeubSU?t=40m9s

Try telling that to LEAF owners in Pheonix.

Interesting! Thanks for the link. Note that this is for LiFePO4 cells. They are very different from lithium oxides, of which LiMnO2 the LEAF uses is a special subbranch. CODA is about the only commercial EV, which uses LiFEPO4. The A123 nanophosphate cells, which were developed for field applications without TMS, were LiFePO4-based as well. If I had to guess why Nissan did not use this chemistry in the LEAF, I would have to say that it was cost followed by energy density.

 

[JPWhite]

Interesting! Thanks for the link. Note that this is for LiFePO4 cells. They are very different from lithium oxides, of which LiMnO2 the LEAF uses is a special subbranch. CODA is about the only commercial EV, which uses LiFEPO4. The A123 nanophosphate cells, which were developed for field applications without TMS, were LiFePO4-based as well. If I had to guess why Nissan did not use this chemistry in the LEAF, I would have to say that it was cost followed by energy density.

Wow 75 degrees c is 167 degrees F!!

Shame Nissan can't/won't offer this battery technology for vehicles for sale in hot climates. I'm sure LEAF'ers in Pheonix would be willing to pay a premium for a 'hot weather package' using heat resistant, or as Jack Rickard would put it, heat loving batteries.

 

[jspearman]

The arbitration specialists are definitely Nissan employees and have Nissan email addresses. I agree that Nissan should have developed a clear path for lease conversions--would have saved a ton of customers and bad publicity if this would have happened in the fall.

Loving my Volt, and we replaced the Leaf with a RAV4. Really impressed with both cars. Leaf still drives better, IMHO, but I probably won't look at another Leaf here until they have active thermal management.

 

[JRP3]

Just remember that Jack has a lot of wacked out theories that don't have much to do with reality. Jack is simply equating increased energy and power output at higher temperatures and extrapolating that to longer cycle life. It might be similar to saying an ICE puts out more power at redline than at idle so it will last longer if you always floor it. LiFePO4 is more heat tolerant and certainly a better choice in warm climates but I expect electrolyte breakdown to be accelerated at higher temps in that chemistry as well as any other, just to a lesser degree.

 

[Herm]

Wow 75 degrees c is 167 degrees F!!
Shame Nissan can't/won't offer this battery technology for vehicles for sale in hot climates. I'm sure LEAF'ers in Pheonix would be willing to pay a premium for a 'hot weather package' using heat resistant, or as Jack Rickard would put it, heat loving batteries.

Those batteries would add 300lbs to the Leaf, same as Jack sitting on the passenger seat .. probably would also add to the cost. Maybe Nissan does not know how to make A123 cells?. Its just easier to do leases only in Arizona.

 

[JPWhite]

Its just easier to do leases only in Arizona.

Sounds like the most expedient mitigation plan.

How about Timbuktu, do you buy or lease there?

 

[leafkabob]

The arbitration specialists are definitely Nissan employees and have Nissan email addresses. I agree that Nissan should have developed a clear path for lease conversions--would have saved a ton of customers and bad publicity if this would have happened in the fall.

Loving my Volt, and we replaced the Leaf with a RAV4. Really impressed with both cars. Leaf still drives better, IMHO, but I probably won't look at another Leaf here until they have active thermal management.

Jspearman, do you mind sharing which mileage offset formula Nissan used for your buyback? Mine was total miles driven X $.275 per mile.

 

[GRA]

Came across an interesting segment on a recent EVTV episode by our friend Jack Ricard. He claims heat is GOOD for Lithium Ion batteries. They last longer!!

http://youtu.be/175PEdeubSU?t=40m9s

Try telling that to LEAF owners in Pheonix.

Interesting! Thanks for the link. Note that this is for LiFePO4 cells. They are very different from lithium oxides, of which LiMnO2 the LEAF uses is a special subbranch. CODA is about the only commercial EV, which uses LiFEPO4. The A123 nanophosphate cells, which were developed for field applications without TMS, were LiFePO4-based as well. If I had to guess why Nissan did not use this chemistry in the LEAF, I would have to say that it was cost followed by energy density.

I doubt it was cost, as LiFePo4 should be cheaper than LiMN204. I think it was specific energy/specific power, and besides, that's what AESC makes. I've long thought that among current choices, LiFePO4 makes the most sense for a consumer BEV, with Lithium Titanate another possibility. The Chinese certainly thought LiFePO4 was a winner; Unfortunately, BYD and Coda haven't exactly set the world on fire, and as for Fisker, we'll have to see if A123's new Chinese owners bail them out. I guess we'll have to wait for the Spark to get an LiFePO4 battery for the 'masses'.

 

[Joeviocoe]

Wow 75 degrees c is 167 degrees F!!
Shame Nissan can't/won't offer this battery technology for vehicles for sale in hot climates. I'm sure LEAF'ers in Pheonix would be willing to pay a premium for a 'hot weather package' using heat resistant, or as Jack Rickard would put it, heat loving batteries.

Those batteries would add 300lbs to the Leaf, same as Jack sitting on the passenger seat .. probably would also add to the cost. Maybe Nissan does not know how to make A123 cells?. Its just easier to do leases only in Arizona.

Using a single chemistry battery for all Leafs is an easy financial choice for Nissan. There are all sorts of extra costs if they had to do R&D and Tooling and Testing.. of a Hot weather package Leaf that had a different chemistry. Nissan packages the cells in-house and a different chemistry would need different packaging... especially if a different manufacturer.
For similar reasons, Nissan does not offer a slightly different styling for the U.S. market either (yet).

Nissan wanted (needed) to get the Leaf out into the market quickly, and cheaply. Even if that meant upsetting a bunch of people. 2nd or 3rd gen Leafs might go different route... if they develop the brand enough to warrant continued investment to expand and start branching out customization for different segments and regions.

 

[Darren]

I've been reading through this thread and have found it very interesting. Unfortunately, there are ao many pages that I have yet to find the answer I am looking for. I am very curious if anyone has successfully had Nissan buy back their LEAF outside of AZ?

 

[surfingslovak]

I've been reading through this thread and have found it very interesting. Unfortunately, there are ao many pages that I have yet to find the answer I am looking for. I am very curious if anyone has successfully had Nissan buy back their LEAF outside of AZ?

Yes, ALLWATZ in Palm Springs. Darren, what's your situation, if you don't mind me asking?