Defectors

[smkettner]

I have two friends who got their Leafs for HOV lane access more than anything else. Today, one is driving a PiP and the other is driving a Volt. Both got out from under their leases but had to pay to do it. Range anxiety and range limitation pushed them out of the Leaf camp after less than a year of ownership.

Enhanced range cannot come soon enough for the Leaf! Even then, it may not be sufficient. Before I heard about Nissan upping the "freeway speed" range to 91+- miles per charge I told myself that I would not lease another one unless it had a range of 100 miles at freeway speeds. I've got 20 months to go.

IMO if you buy for the HOV sticker LEAF is the wrong car for you. HOV people generally have a long commute through the worst traffic areas and prefer to drive 70+ mph. This is just not compatible with current LEAF. I have my stickers, never put them on.

 

[DeaneG]

...IMO if you buy for the HOV sticker LEAF is the wrong car for you. HOV people generally have a long commute through the worst traffic areas and prefer to drive 70+ mph. This is just not compatible with current LEAF...

HOV stickers are working great for me, 25 mile roundtrip commute. Much less stress and accident danger, and I can wake up half an hour later every day (no need to hit the freeway early to avoid stopped traffic). It's been great. If only it could go as far as San Francisco or Berkeley and back, I'd be completely satisfied.

 

[BlueSL]

If only it could go as far as San Francisco or Berkeley and back, I'd be completely satisfied.

This pretty much sums it up in a nutshell for me, too. Different starting and ending points, but the same idea. 100 miles at freeway speeds is what I "need." I'd buy an Infiniti that went 150 miles at freeway speeds in a heartbeat.

All other mileage numbers are meaningless, IMO. I am very careful when people ask me about the car's range to explain that it will only go 73 miles at freeway speeds.

 

[EatsShootsandLeafs]

All other mileage numbers are meaningless, IMO. I am very careful when people ask me about the car's range to explain that it will only go 73 miles at freeway speeds.

Good! I saw a video of a guy talking about his Leaf and how it was about 100, a bit less on highway, a bit more elsewhere, but that's certainly above average and not a fair representation of its range, really. I spoke to people about it yesterday and by far THE question is: What's its range? The only proper answer is 73 miles "give or take depending on conditions".

 

[Cheezmo]

And despite all that, I consistently get 40-50 miles of range on my Volts. And in the same kind of driving, 60-70 on my Leaf.

Volt: EPA 35, Claim 35, Actual 40+
Leaf: EPA 73, Claim 100, Actual 60-80 (and surely declining as I live in Texas)

Ignoring everything else, which company would you trust more?

I think that Nissan touting a 100 mile range for so long had something to do with it. Then the EPA comes out with a much more realistic 73 mile range...

Speaking of that. I notice Nissan is still advertising the vehicle as 100 miles range. When the EPA came out and rated the Volt at 35 miles, GM immediately changed their advertising to match the EPA rating. Now that they get 38 miles with the new battery they are advertising that. But Nissan hasn't flinched and still touts "up to 100 miles range" on their website.

After owning the car for a year and a half I tend to agree with the EPA on the range. While I know it is certainly possible to get 100 miles in mild city driving situations, that is not realistic for most people.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

I think we are jumping the gun on both end here. One thing GM did well is hiding any degradation from the end user. Granted there will always be had coming to the rescue but that kinds negates the green thing

 

[caffeinekid]

As others have mentioned before, merely stating the maximum range of the vehicle doesn't paint a very accurate picture. I would LOVE it if the thing would ACTUALLY travel a complete 73 miles (which it usually doesn't because it isn't perfect California climate here in Texas) and at mile 70, no matter where that might be, there was a L3 charging station where I could charge up and get another 73 miles. If that were the case, I could probably get away with charging only once while on the road, but as it currently stands I have to charge 2 or 3 times a day- all the time having to plan my charges accordingly. Do I charge here an now, or do I try to make it to the next station? What if there is some sort of delay, detour or the station is down? Etc..

 

[jkirkebo]

This pretty much sums it up in a nutshell for me, too. Different starting and ending points, but the same idea. 100 miles at freeway speeds is what I "need." I'd buy an Infiniti that went 150 miles at freeway speeds in a heartbeat.

Sounds like you're a candidate for the 60kWh Model S...

 

[jkirkebo]

We've had our Leaf nearly a year now, and we have done a lot of long-distance driving with it (up to 240 miles in a day). Since we have a extensive fast charger network here, this works well in the summer half of the year. However winter is different as not only the range drops a lot, but the charge times increase a lot too. This leads to the trips taking too much time.

So I have ordered a Model S P85 to do the long distance driving instead. I wouldn't call myself a defector though, as we will keep the Leaf as our second car. The VW TDI is the one ending up being sold, as I hate driving it now that I'm used to driving electric

I could never go back.

I agree that the Leaf needs a larger battery though. Around 32kWh would have made life much easier for us for sure, and I'd happily have paid $8k extra for the extra 8kWh. Or make a 40kWh version and a cheaper 20kWh version for those who doesn't need so much lange.

I'd also pay more for an even larger battery in the Model S if they would offer it before my number is up. Using the 3400mAh cells would up the capacity from 85kWh to 93kWh

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

As others have mentioned before, merely stating the maximum range of the vehicle doesn't paint a very accurate picture. I would LOVE it if the thing would ACTUALLY travel a complete 73 miles (which it usually doesn't because it isn't perfect California climate here in Texas) and at mile 70, no matter where that might be, there was a L3 charging station where I could charge up and get another 73 miles. If that were the case, I could probably get away with charging only once while on the road, but as it currently stands I have to charge 2 or 3 times a day- all the time having to plan my charges accordingly. Do I charge here an now, or do I try to make it to the next station? What if there is some sort of delay, detour or the station is down? Etc..

so is the issue with the car and its range or public charging network?

sure there are places still in this country (i live just down the road from one) where you will see signs "next gas 45 miles" or whatever and you do have to think, "do i want to stop at this one or risk the next one?"

but how many time do we say "What if the next station is out of gas?"

 

[TomT]

Yes! (Though, if Nissan hadn't lied about the 100 miles range - LA4 is meaningless in the U.S. - I do believe it would be less of an issue...)

so is the issue with the car and its range, or public charging network?

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

Yes! (Though, if Nissan hadn't lied about the 100 miles range - LA4 is meaningless in the U.S. - I do believe it would be less of an issue...)

so is the issue with the car and its range, or public charging network?

oh my god!!

when are we gonna stop crying over 27 fricking miles?? like the additional 13.5 miles we can wander from home is that critical?? i highly doubt it

 

[caffeinekid]

As others have mentioned before, merely stating the maximum range of the vehicle doesn't paint a very accurate picture. I would LOVE it if the thing would ACTUALLY travel a complete 73 miles (which it usually doesn't because it isn't perfect California climate here in Texas) and at mile 70, no matter where that might be, there was a L3 charging station where I could charge up and get another 73 miles. If that were the case, I could probably get away with charging only once while on the road, but as it currently stands I have to charge 2 or 3 times a day- all the time having to plan my charges accordingly. Do I charge here an now, or do I try to make it to the next station? What if there is some sort of delay, detour or the station is down? Etc..

so is the issue with the car and its range or public charging network?

sure there are places still in this country (i live just down the road from one) where you will see signs "next gas 45 miles" or whatever and you do have to think, "do i want to stop at this one or risk the next one?"

but how many time do we say "What if the next station is out of gas?"

It is both really- Nissan for embellishing the figures then and now, and the lack of ubiquitous charging infrastructure. I actually have to deal with these things on a daily basis here in Houston. We have a relatively nice QC network thanks to the hard work of eVgo, but there are issues with having to go out of my way to get charged due to their locations. And the 70 miles between charges under real world driving conditions in this region have never materialized. Instead, I have to plan on ~ 50 miles which puts a crimp in my logistical comfort zone.

I also believe that the public at large has been trained to take refueling for granted. We are in the habit of NOT having to think about refueling. Even when we hear that the car goes ~70 miles, the next thought isn't about route strategy based on where the 25 minute fill ups will be. One of these days I will blog the figures of my experiment using the Leaf as a service vehicle. Until then, it is difficult to explain exactly what I am trying to get across here, but suffice it to say that our next vehicles will include a Model S unless Nissan comes up with a better pack with considerably more real world range. I still think 150 miles is the magic number.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

As others have mentioned before, merely stating the maximum range of the vehicle doesn't paint a very accurate picture. I would LOVE it if the thing would ACTUALLY travel a complete 73 miles (which it usually doesn't because it isn't perfect California climate here in Texas) and at mile 70, no matter where that might be, there was a L3 charging station where I could charge up and get another 73 miles. If that were the case, I could probably get away with charging only once while on the road, but as it currently stands I have to charge 2 or 3 times a day- all the time having to plan my charges accordingly. Do I charge here an now, or do I try to make it to the next station? What if there is some sort of delay, detour or the station is down? Etc..

so is the issue with the car and its range or public charging network?

sure there are places still in this country (i live just down the road from one) where you will see signs "next gas 45 miles" or whatever and you do have to think, "do i want to stop at this one or risk the next one?"

but how many time do we say "What if the next station is out of gas?"

It is both really- Nissan for embellishing the figures then and now, and the lack of ubiquitous charging infrastructure. I actually have to deal with these things on a daily basis here in Houston. We have a relatively nice QC network thanks to the hard work of eVgo, but there are issues with having to go out of my way to get charged due to their locations. And the 70 miles between charges under real world driving conditions in this region have never materialized. Instead, I have to plan on ~ 50 miles which puts a crimp in my logistical comfort zone.

I also believe that the public at large has been trained to take refueling for granted. We are in the habit of NOT having to think about refueling. Even when we hear that the car goes ~70 miles, the next thought isn't about route strategy based on where the 25 minute fill ups will be. One of these days I will blog the figures of my experiment using the Leaf as a service vehicle. Until then, it is difficult to explain exactly what I am trying to get across here, but suffice it to say that our next vehicles will include a Model S unless Nissan comes up with a better pack with considerably more real world range. I still think 150 miles is the magic number.

we all have different needs here so let me state mine. a car with a 150 mile range would not work as well for me without an effective quick charge network simply because i have made 2 trips in my pathetically incapable "73 mile" LEAF with a semi effect QC network. i can only dream of what else i could do had i a fully effective QC network.

facts are (one, i have a range of "near 90 miles per charge in Summer" based on my chosen method of driving) i rarely charge the top half of my battery with QC because it is not an effective use of my time. having an effective charging network allows me to do this.

i would MUCH rather charge 10 minutes and get 36 miles of range over charging 30 minutes and getting 68 miles of range. i simply QC 3 times and now i got 108 plus my original 85 so i am near 200 miles of range OR a place that a 150 mile EV cannot go

now before you say "if you had a 150 mile EV, you would only have to stop once" i say, "fine, give me the money to pay for that big ass battery and we both be happy..."

now; keep in mind. there is no one in this equation that is completely blameless and i should not complain because i have a decent QC network that works in 2½ different directions. it is MUCH better than nothing but still is a long way from being where we need it to be.

but if applying an equitable level of blame; i still say that public charging, even in my area that has one of the more developed charging networks should bear the brunt of the blame.

i had no illusions of my LEAF getting 100 miles from waaay before i took delivery. the mileage charts Nissan posted made that about obvious and those charts came out waaaay before the forms you signed were even printed so why are you blaming Nissan again??

i also had no illusions that i would be getting 80 miles on a charge 25,000 miles down the road either, so cant blame no one for that either...

so what was i expecting?? how about the 40 DCFCs that were promised?? i anticipated that the rollout might be behind a bit, so dates being pushed back were not a surprise to me. it is not the size of the project but the scope and that each station requires a whole new set of entities getting on the same page...but its now more than a year after the fact and we have 2? most areas in the EV Highway Project have none?

so, if applying the blame equally based on promises and expectations, i give Nissan... well, i will give them 5% since everyone here thinks they deserve something...

 

[SteveInSeattle]

I predict there will be a lot of defectors when the leases end. (This will also result in some very good used Leaf prices, for buyers). In Japan, Nissan is coming out with a Leaf with LESS range, but it seems that Americans drive farther and seem more concerned with range. I can do my commute twice on one charge, and as the range decreases with age I will still be able to commute back and forth to work..so the Leaf suits my needs perfectly. There are many others out there with reasonable distance commutes for whom the Leaf is an excellent choice--but the message is not getting out, or, I suspect, the price is too high.

 

[PracticingHuman]

I also believe that the public at large has been trained to take refueling for granted. We are in the habit of NOT having to think about refueling. Even when we hear that the car goes ~70 miles, the next thought isn't about route strategy based on where the 25 minute fill ups will be. One of these days I will blog the figures of my experiment using the Leaf as a service vehicle. Until then, it is difficult to explain exactly what I am trying to get across here, but suffice it to say that our next vehicles will include a Model S unless Nissan comes up with a better pack with considerably more real world range. I still think 150 miles is the magic number.

Yes, the public has "been trained" (read learned) to take refueling for granted. However, once we willingly decide to step into the vanguard of the EV driving paradigm we sign away our expectations to function as if we were driving ICE vehicles. There is no habit that cannot be broken.

The proverbial road less traveled is not paved, oiled, and resurfaced. It is a rocky road with potholes, boulders, gravel, and dirt. I chose to drive an EV as I watched gallons upon gallons of oil flood the Gulf and realized as long as I contributed to the demand of fossil fuels with my own consumption I was part of the problem. However, I knew I would have to make sacrifices for my own altruism. If we want to talk about functioning in the real world it would be not expecting we can pay up to 1/10 the cost for fueling our personal transportation without having to give up something in return. Then as EV demands increase as ranges increase with newer technology, power consumption will increase and we might not see these same cushy fueling costs down the line.

 

[TonyWilliams]

so is the issue with the car and its range or public charging network?

Both.

 

[caffeinekid]

we all have different needs here so let me state mine. a car with a 150 mile range would not work as well for me without an effective quick charge network simply because i have made 2 trips in my pathetically incapable "73 mile" LEAF with a semi effect QC network. i can only dream of what else i could do had i a fully effective QC network.

facts are (one, i have a range of "near 90 miles per charge in Summer" based on my chosen method of driving) i rarely charge the top half of my battery with QC because it is not an effective use of my time. having an effective charging network allows me to do this.

i would MUCH rather charge 10 minutes and get 36 miles of range over charging 30 minutes and getting 68 miles of range. i simply QC 3 times and now i got 108 plus my original 85 so i am near 200 miles of range OR a place that a 150 mile EV cannot go

now before you say "if you had a 150 mile EV, you would only have to stop once" i say, "fine, give me the money to pay for that big ass battery and we both be happy..."

now; keep in mind. there is no one in this equation that is completely blameless and i should not complain because i have a decent QC network that works in 2½ different directions. it is MUCH better than nothing but still is a long way from being where we need it to be.

but if applying an equitable level of blame; i still say that public charging, even in my area that has one of the more developed charging networks should bear the brunt of the blame.

i had no illusions of my LEAF getting 100 miles from waaay before i took delivery. the mileage charts Nissan posted made that about obvious and those charts came out waaaay before the forms you signed were even printed so why are you blaming Nissan again??

i also had no illusions that i would be getting 80 miles on a charge 25,000 miles down the road either, so cant blame no one for that either...

so what was i expecting?? how about the 40 DCFCs that were promised?? i anticipated that the rollout might be behind a bit, so dates being pushed back were not a surprise to me. it is not the size of the project but the scope and that each station requires a whole new set of entities getting on the same page...but its now more than a year after the fact and we have 2? most areas in the EV Highway Project have none?

so, if applying the blame equally based on promises and expectations, i give Nissan... well, i will give them 5% since everyone here thinks they deserve something...

I feel your pain on the L3 chargers, but as you predicted the limitations of the Leaf, you must have also suspected that a lot of these promises were based on unsustainable subsidies and a lot of green washing. In that regard, a lot of these discussions have come full circle IMO. In the end, there are many factors that come to play in the Leaf cycle, and the EV equation by extension. I agree with everything that you have put forth, however in the end the cost of the vehicle, its range and the available infrastructure will all come into play when the leases expire and the remaining honeymooners come to terms with their purchases. We all want EVs to survive for a lot of the same reasons. And many of us believe that Nissan in particular deserves our business for the mere fact that they took the lead and were first to deliver to the market. I agree that they should be rewarded and given some slack despite their propaganda. However, we tend to view their (EVs) merits with more patience than the general public. For me, I am not willing to pay $30K a piece again for cars that only go 50-70 miles on a charge. Nissan is going to have to innovate further if they want my purchase next time around. If I can get twice the range (among other benefits) out of a car that cost less than twice as much...a car such as the Tesla S (and possibly the X) by the time I am finished with the Leaf, Nissan had better have something better to offer or I will be moving on. I think it is important to also point out that Tesla is not "BS"ing anyone with regards to performance.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

I feel your pain on the L3 chargers, but as you predicted the limitations of the Leaf, you must have also suspected that a lot of these promises were based on unsustainable subsidies and a lot of green washing.

that is where we diverge. i feel that getting on locally homed, owned and grown transportation infrastructure is a requirement and not some "la de da" green thing.

this country's finances is going down the drain and foreign oil is one big reason for it. not asking for preferential treatment towards EVs...only equal treatment. lets match dollar for dollar what we give Big Oil

I agree with everything that you have put forth, however in the end the cost of the vehicle, its range and the available infrastructure will all come into play when the leases expire and the remaining honeymooners come to terms with their purchases.

yes i agree and the normal argument that the average new car price for 2012 is $30k so an EV is just a bit more fails simply because it implies that we are happy with that price. i sold cars, i can tell you from very personal experience that is not even close to being true.

We all want EVs to survive for a lot of the same reasons. And many of us believe that Nissan in particular deserves our business for the mere fact that they took the lead and were first to deliver to the market.

i dont know where you stand but from my point of view my choices are the LEAF or the MiEV. there is nothing else out there that works for me that i can pay for. period. No QC means not even a consideration for me. this is 19 months after the fact and there is NOTHING on the horizon. nothing talked about, introduced, planned, nothing... so its hard to say i am loyal to Nissan because they were first since there is essentially not a race. the EV market is highly segmented and i am in no way saying that X or Y is bad. it simply does not work well for me and EVs have too much compromise to "settle"

Nissan has allowed me to get into the market with minimal compromise. it might be too much compromise for others but its not even close for me. I love this car but only because i knew what i was falling in love with. there are a lot of people here who simply cannot say that.

I think it is important to also point out that Tesla is not "BS"ing anyone with regards to performance.

oh?? you will need to clarify that point. are you referring to Teslas 300 mile range? hope not. if so, i have some articles you should read