LEAF 2 : What we know so far (2018 or later?)

[DaveinOlyWA]

anyone notice the configurator has been taken down?

 

[jdcbomb]

Nissan cracking down!

 

[GRA]

RE: LTLFTcomposite comments:

Tesla has a fair solution as long as you stay on the "big" roads, but if you get off the beaten path (which is what road trips are for IMO), Tesla sucks just as much as any other EV.

Today, I am confident that for regional road trips (for example anywhere in the SF Bay area up to Sacramento, Napa or Tahoe) a medium range EV will be just fine.

But you can't conveniently* get to Yosemite or over to and along Hwy 395 via it yet in anything but a Tesla, which certainly falls within what I consider to be a regional (weekend) road trip, i.e. no more than a single en-route stop each way (Groveland SC). Ideally, I want to be able to reach Lee Vining from the East Bay via Hwy 120 non-stop (207 miles from home, but net elevation gain of 6,700 feet and max. elevation of 9,941 enroute, in temps that may range anywhere from the triple digits down to freezing or a bit below while carrying a full load), and only the big battery Model 3 or an S100D can (probably) do that in all the conditions I'm likely to face, for now. But there's no SC in Lee Vining, only one in Mammoth Lakes, 26 miles and +1,200' further. While there are CCS/CHAdeMO along Hwy 99, they are really too far from the mountains (and too close to the Bay Area) to be convenient and well-placed to maximize charging speeds, and right now they're limited to just one or two per site. There are plans to install dual standard QCs along approach roads (e.g. Groveland and Yosemite Lakes on Hwy 120), but who knows when/if that will happen. For anyone who wants to travel any mountain route between U.S. 50 and Hwy 120, there's essentially nothing.

The thing is that for those less than five percent greater than 200-mile trips that fall into the long range category, does it make sense for that to be the primary decision criteria for acquiring an EV?

For that kind of distance, an EV just does not have it yet. None, nada, not even Tesla can make the grade to be able to meet the benchmark of 80 mph average speed, 350+miles range, and a 15-minute recharge. <snip>

Yes, BEVs remain a poor choice for extended (multi-leg QC) road trips given the other options. However, providing non-stop 1-way weekend road trip range does represent considerable extra value to lots of people, as it provides convenience and reduced anxiety, and gives them far more flexibility in where they charge. Those of us who regularly take same want 200+ miles of range (plus a reserve) in all weather conditions while climbing thousands of feet at flow of traffic speeds, plus destination charging and enroute QCs to give us options without sucking up a lot of extra time. There'a a major step advantage between only being able to do easy weekend trips in good conditions, and all weekend trips in any conditions, and for a BEV that requires 300+ miles of EPA range.

So, 150 miles is fine for commuting, local and most regional trips as well as shorter inter-regional ones, 200+ buys you some more speed/convenience on longer inter-regional trips plus more longevity for local trips, and 300+ buys you even more speed/convenience and makes non-stop inter-regional trips to the mountains possible year-round, and even greater local longevity, reducing the life-cycle costs even more for those of us who keep cars a long time (the shortest period of time I've owned any car is 14.5 years).


*You can get a Bolt to Yosemite Valley and back from a QC along S.R. 99 with a bit of care, but going further and higher to Tuolumne Meadows or beyond and return is either impossible, or would require severe compromises in speed and HVAC use. Charging stations in Yosemite are very limited (2 J1772 plus 1 Tesla destination charger), and currently restricted to the Valley.

 

[OrientExpress]

GRA: "conveniently*" is the operative word here, and even with a Tesla, going up there is like planning an EV trip for the Donner Party.

Yosemite Valley has a couple of L2 chargers one by the General Store and another over at the Ranger's headquarters, but it is not a high confidence proposition. And going over Tioga Pass and over to 395 is not something I would want to try in any EV.

But I would also say that give it another 2-3 years and there will be much more mid-point charging available in the Sierra.

I'm seeing the same sort of growth of infrastructure in Napa today. In the fall of 2015, there was just a smattering of chargers in Napa, today it is a marketing advantage for wineries and hotels to have destination charging.

I had a photo shoot recently for a Lonely Planet coffee table book about EV friendly scenic trips in the US and did the Napa part. Nissan had me use a '17 LEAF, and I was able to drive 96 miles from my house in South San Jose to Napa on one charge, got a quick charge there, did the shoot in the valley and back again on another charge for a total of about 275 miles. It was OK, had lunch and dinner at the quick charge point in Napa. I expect the Sierra to be like that soon. Mountainous travel is much more challenging for an EV so I would expect that it will take longer to take the relaxing regional trip like you desire.

I think it is great that we can even contemplate a Sierra trip in an EV. It can be done today, but it's still impractical for all but the diehard. Personally, I go to the mountains to relax not to have any sort of anxiety.

As a comparison, the extra $9K that the Model 3 big battery costs, I can book a bunch of Gulfstream flights and stays at a lakefront mansion in Tahoe for the same amount!

 

[GRA]

GRA: "conveniently*" is the operative word here, and even with a Tesla, going up there is like planning an EV trip for the Donner Party.

Yosemite Valley has a couple of L2 chargers one by the General Store and another over at the Ranger's headquarters, but it is not a high confidence proposition. And going over Tioga Pass and over to 395 is not something I would want to try in any EV.

Agreed on the bolded part, which is why I said the Bolt could do the round trip from 99 to the Valley (without depending on the Valley charging). Actually, it's fairly easy in a Tesla to get over Tioga and down to Mammoth if you charge at the Groveland SC (I've run the trip on EVtripplanner many times using a variety of Model S battery sizes, loads and in all likely temps, because it's a trip I make fairly often). Doing it in a small battery (<=75kWh) Model S can require some care and extra charging time with a full load in fall, but it's doable without too much compromise. The 1,000 lb. lighter and smaller 220 mile battery Model 3 should require less compromise, and the big battery Model 3 should handle it with no issues at all (at least when new), and may be able to do it in some conditions without needing the stop in Groveland.

But I would also say that give it another 2-3 years and there will be much more mid-point charging available in the Sierra. <snip>

There sure as hell needs to be.

Mountainous travel is much more challenging for an EV so I would expect that it will take longer to take the relaxing regional trip like you desire.

I think it is great that we can even contemplate a Sierra trip in an EV. It can be done today, but it's still impractical for all but the diehard. Personally, I go to the mountains to relax not to have any sort of anxiety.

See above. I could do it now in the big battery Model 3, at least to the places I'm most likely to go. It's still not as quick or convenient as an ICE where I can often do the round trip un-refueled, or if not, get gas anywhere and be on my way again in 5 minutes, but it's getting there.

As a comparison, the extra $9K that the Model 3 big battery costs, I can book a bunch of Gulfstream flights and stays at a lakefront mansion in Tahoe for the same amount!

Sure. And for the $30 - $50k that a new BEV would cost me, I could keep my existing ICE and drive it for another 15 years without dealing with any of the road trip inconvenience that a BEV will impose on me for years yet.

 

[Valdemar]

60 miles for the majority in a car that can only go 60 miles on average considering winter months and degradation. Solid numbers!

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

like planning an EV trip for the Donner Party

Too soon

The financial justification for any of these really isn't there if you're talking about just getting down the road inexpensively with a minimal degree of comfort. That's called a $16k Sentra :lol:
Of course lots of people go well beyond just getting the cheapest thing they can when it comes to car purchases. In a way buying a Bolt is kinda like buying a Corvette. Nobody really needs either of them, a Cruze has greater utility, but they're making that choice because it's something unique and it intrigues them. When it doesn't do what you needed to do though, that's when it starts to become a problem. Speaking for myself I might take a really long road trip, say over a thousand miles, only once a year, and cross-country trips maybe only 5 times in my lifetime. I don't need to make a vehicle selection based on those outlier cases, I can always rent for those. But I drive to Orlando or Tampa fairly regularly, maybe once a month or more, 200 or 250 miles each way. With the leaf I couldn't even pick up somebody at the Miami Airport. That gets really annoying especially when you're paying a premium for the vehicle.

 

[OrientExpress]

GRA, your points are well taken, but only the most die-hard EV enthusiast would even consider the effort and planning required to make a trip like you describe (queue the die-hards to sing "I do that every day"! )

But all in all, you reinforce the notion that long-range EV travel is not even close to being ready for the mainstream, at least not yet. Someday it will be, but certainly not today. The good news is that the 95th percentile short and mid-range use cases for an EV are getting pretty stable, and that will drive wider adoption which in turn will drive the need for universal infrastructure.

Give it a couple of more years, and these edge cases that seem to be the rage as absolute imperatives will also be a no-brainer. If you want a goal, then make it 80/350/20. When mainstream EVs can do that, then we can celebrate, but not until then.

EVs today are as personal computers were in the 90's.

And everyone, do us all a favor and please stop with the 2011/12 LEAF analogies. They are irrelevant when talking about EV technology and progress today. Today's LEAF only shares the shape and name with those early cars. Thank you for your consideration of this request.

 

[jdcbomb]

Maybe I'm a slow poke and like to save gas / maximize cruising range, but why is the 80/350 requirement valid? That many people drive at 10-20 mpg OVER the speed limit? Plus any car (EV or ICE) experiences significantly increasing drag forces for every mph over 65 mph. I typically set cruise around 70 mph.

 

[lorenfb]

The financial justification for any of these really isn't there if you're talking about just getting down the road inexpensively with a minimal degree of comfort. That's called a $16k Sentra :lol:
Of course lots of people go well beyond just getting the cheapest thing they can when it comes to car purchases. In a way buying a Bolt is kinda like buying a Corvette. Nobody really needs either of them, a Cruze has greater utility, but they're making that choice because it's something unique and it intrigues them.

Yes, and that's why it's questionable when the BEV acceptance will ever 'cross' the "chasm" (GRA's applicable marketing
term). So when the Leaf 2 with a range of 150 - 200 miles begins to sell marginally like the Bolt so far, that chasm widens,
i.e. we the early adopters can no longer provide needed growth impetus. Tesla presently is an anomaly with its 400K
reservations. Once the Model 3 long term ASP of $45K - $50K is realized by the marketplace, e.g. reservation holders,
will the Model 3 be just a lower priced Model S with a marginal volume increase resulting in even greater Tesla losses?

Bottom line: A BEV range approaching 200 miles may not be the needed panacea to achieve wide scale BEV acceptance,
i.e. to cross the chasm. Without government intervention, the ICEV (hybrid type) may remain the mainstay for the near
term future.

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

Tesla did/is doing it by being cool. Surprisingly none of the other manufacturers have figured this out; you'd think with their marketing prowess it would be easy.

From what I see of LEAF 2.0 Nissan hasn't progressed much in that regard, although if the de-dorked the styling, gave it better range and fixed the degradation problem they may at least get some broader acceptance. But half a million customers clamoring for it? No way.

 

[user 10599]

Maybe I'm a slow poke and like to save gas / maximize cruising range, but why is the 80/350 requirement valid? That many people drive at 10-20 mpg OVER the speed limit? Plus any car (EV or ICE) experiences significantly increasing drag forces for every mph over 65 mph. I typically set cruise around 70 mph.

I believe that criteria was based on the discussion of the long range road trips. That usually means outside of urban areas where there are long stretches of open road. Have you been on one of those lately? Think Riverside out toward Palm Springs or to Vegas or between NoCal and SoCal trips. Yes, a lot of people do their long drives at higher speeds. If you do the 70 mph cruise control in some places, you better be on the far right and expect to be passed by the trucks.

You have a good point about the significantly increasing drag over 65mph. That is a big part of why the BEVs aren't ready yet for the long road trips. To drive the long distances efficiently, you have to adapt the driving speed to be out of sync with the way the population currently does long distance driving. Most aren't going to do that. Therefore, they will get less range than they are supposed to and then troubles will start as the fraud claims pile in. BEVs are great for the 90% of driving. This next generation coming online now is great for the 95%. But we are still a ways away from having BEVs that are good long road trip cars. Most people aren't willing to make the driving adjustments, plan that thoroughly, hope the charging station on the route is working and available, and spend the extra time at each stop for charging vs. what it used to take to fill a tank. For that reason, mass adoption will likely be as commuter cars by families with more than one car so they have one that can cover the distance needs when they want to (need to is debatable as renting a car can cover this aspect). Fortunately, that is a huge portion of the population.

 

[user 10599]

From what I see of LEAF 2.0 Nissan hasn't progressed much in that regard, although if the de-dorked the styling, gave it better range and fixed the degradation problem they may at least get some broader acceptance. But half a million customers clamoring for it? No way.

Leaf 2.0 de-dorked? Done - looks more like a mainstream car that will appeal to the mainstream buyer
Better range? Done - 150+/- miles vs. 107.
Fixed degredation? TBD
Half a million clamoring for it? Quite possibly over the entire multiyear sales cycle. Leaf 1 had over 200k units worldwide by end of 2015. De-dorked and better range should make this more appealing to more people. So half a million units might well sell. It won't be that many signing up a launch. But that isn't the definition of success. If it was, then Tesla is the only successful car ever made.

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

The dedorkification may be the biggest factor. Another thing could be when 1.0 came out there was no Tesla to speak of, hence no coolness, just a technological oddity like that kid who always busted the curve everyone hated. LEAF 2.0 *could* benefit from the Tesla effect, being cool adjacent yet attainable as they roll off the line in Smyrna with a regularity the less experienced manufacturer in the west is still struggling to achieve. Still, it will falter, because once a dork always a dork. They could put a Tesla ludicrous power train in a GTR or 370, once you slap that LEAF badge on it kiss the image goodbye. They probably would have done better to just call it something completely new.

 

[lorenfb]

Tesla did/is doing it by being cool. Surprisingly none of the other manufacturers have figured this out; you'd think with their marketing prowess it would be easy.

What, it's all about "cool", a new marketing lexicon? Again naivete abounds. And what of any real significance
has Tesla really done? Is this what "cool" means?:

1. Has continued to lose money on each vehicle sold.
2. Scammed potential buyers to loan it close to 1/2 billion dollars, based on an imaginary $35K BEV with
implied standard features found in the Model S.
3. Failed to convince Panasonic of its long term viability, affecting Panasonic's willingness to fulfill its $2B
commitment to Giga.
4. Has no key technological ecosystem protecting the market share it may achieve in the future.
5. Recently lowered the Model X price to increase declining demand.
6. Has essentially indicated that it really couldn't care less about selling a high volume $35K BEV.
7. Continually fails to meet its corporate sales guidance.
8. Has battery production problems even at it comparatively small vehicle production volume.
9. Other than for battery production, Tesla is not as highly vertically integrated as most automotive OEMs.
Thus is highly reliant on its key suppliers.
10. With the Model X target ASP of $45K - $50K, Tesla will begin to cannibalize the sales of the Model S,
thus further reducing its long term viability.

Real "cool", to the naive!

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

Granted we all want 300 miles of range whether we really need it or not but my reality is different. I don't want to pay the price so I have to look at the viability of less range. The difference between usability of the 30 kwh LEAF over the 24 is pretty big so another 10 kwh would be just as big.

What that extra range allows me to do is to stop on my schedule, not the car. Its 2:45 in the morning and I am about to head out for work on 159 mile drive that will take about 2 hours and 45 mins. I won't be able to make the entire drive without stopping. too much coffee and passengers. But in a longer range EV, stopping anywhere for even 15 mins gives me an essential boost that greatly enhances my range. So it might be adding 53 miles of range but the "effective" range in most cases (nearly all cases where I live) is 50% more and sometimes double.

So yeah, not totally satisfied with 160 miles but I can make it work and work quite well

 

[DNAinaGoodWay]

anyone notice the configurator has been taken down?

Yeah, so, cease and desist letter? Hadn't heard of Autobytel before this, how reliable are they? What if it's an orchestrated leak by Nissan? Maybe the Oppama pics too. How many have they already made?

 

[SageBrush]

Tesla did/is doing it by being cool. Surprisingly none of the other manufacturers have figured this out; you'd think with their marketing prowess it would be easy.

What, it's all about "cool", a new marketing lexicon? Again naivete abounds. And what of any real significance
has Tesla really done? Is this what "cool" means?:

1. Has continued to lose money on each vehicle sold.
2. Scammed potential buyers to loan it close to 1/2 billion dollars, based on an imaginary $35K BEV with
implied standard features found in the Model S.
3. Failed to convince Panasonic of its long term viability, affecting Panasonic's willingness to fulfill its $2B
commitment to Giga.
4. Has no key technological ecosystem protecting the market share it may achieve in the future.
5. Recently lowered the Model X price to increase declining demand.
6. Has essentially indicated that it really couldn't care less about selling a high volume $35K BEV.
7. Continually fails to meet its corporate sales guidance.
8. Has battery production problems even at it comparatively small vehicle production volume.
9. Other than for battery production, Tesla is not as highly vertically integrated as most automotive OEMs.
Thus is highly reliant on its key suppliers.
10. With the Model X target ASP of $45K - $50K, Tesla will begin to cannibalize the sales of the Model S,
thus further reducing its long term viability.

Real "cool", to the naive!

1. Profits on every car sold, and invests all profits (and more) in R&D and infrastructure
2. Hogwash
3. Evidence ?
4. SC network, for a start. Motor and battery IP, for a few others. Gigafactory for another.
5. Spin
6. Spin
7. FUD
8. FUD. Gigafactory on track or ahead of guidance
9. Spin. Show me another manufacturer with a Gigafactory and motor production in-house. AESC up for sale does not count
10. FUD. Decide whether high volume production is good or bad; you cannot have it both ways.

 

[LTLFTcomposite]

What, it's all about "cool", a new marketing lexicon?

Pretty much.

 

[jlv]

You have a good point about the significantly increasing drag over 65mph. That is a big part of why the BEVs aren't ready yet for the long road trips. To drive the long distances efficiently, you have to adapt the driving speed to be out of sync with the way the population currently does long distance driving.

While that is definitely true for my driving style with the LEAF (right lane, 60-65MPH while everyone else is doing 75-80MPH), that is definitely not how I drive the Tesla. Instead, I'm in the left line driving the same speed as all the other traffic (75-80MPH). I don't drive differently at all.

Last weekend I found I "all of a sudden" (without advance planning) needed to go to NYC, a trip of 220 miles one-way. I plugged the car in the night before and Saturday morning at 6AM we headed out. Got to Brooklyn at 9:45AM and parked at a garage with a Tesla destination charger ($15 for all day parking + fully charging). At no point did I feel I needed to drive slower than anyone else. This would probably all have been true if I'd had a Bolt (although it probably wouldn't have been as much fun to drive in).

On longer trips with stops for SC, I also find 75MPH (same speed as the rest of the traffic) is just fine. That's because I can still get to the same SC with sufficient reserve power. I think with the right charging infrastructure and sufficient range, BEVs are not an issue on a long road trip.