Update on Battery Warranty Enhancement for 2011 & 2012 LEAF

[mwalsh]

The interesting thing I note from all this is that if the better (but more expensive) separators were available during the design of the existing packs prior to the release of the LEAF, Nissan may have shot themselves (and their customers) in the foot by going the cheaper route. *IF* it can be shown that they chose a cheaper separator rather than use a superior product then do LEAF owners have a claim on the 8yr/100,000 mile warranty for poor workmanship? Not a open and close case because the manufacture maybe faultless, with 'only' the design flawed. I smell a class action if it surfaces they cheaped-out on the battery. Maybe the 5yr/60,000 retroactive warranty was more legally CYA motivated than customer relations motivated. Stranger things have happened at sea.

But they may have been (depending on how long before manufacture the packs were being designed)...the ceramic separator for the Volt piece I posted a link to dates back to January 2009! And if they knew they were going to use them for the Volt back then, I don't see why they couldn't have been used for the LEAF. Surely someone from Polypore must have said, "You know what..."?

And as for us, we TRUSTED that Nissan had this all sussed out. The least they could do for owners is to make this right, irrespective of where we happen to be when the pack warranty runs out. And if we are so few, that wouldn't hurt Nissan's bottom line so much (not anywhere as much as another class-action - the lawyers who helped me sue Chase billed over $2m in hours, plus what Chase's lawyers billed and the settlement amount).

Lesees I don't have as much concern for - nearly all those cars will be Nissan's problem beginning next year.

 

[JPWhite]

And as for us, we TRUSTED that Nissan had this all sussed out. The least they could do for owners is to make this right, irrespective of where we happen to be when the pack warranty runs out.

I agree. I have no problem with them making a judgement call back when the batteries were designed and simply made a bad call. We all screw up from time to time. As you say, having realized a mistake they should be willing to underwrite the resolution.

I got a chuckle when listening to Jack Rickard when the LEAF Pheonix issues first surfaced. He characterized Nissan as performing corporate hara-kiri but not molly coddling the few customers affected. The bit that made me chuckle is that he said Nissan should drive round the owners homes and offer to 'tuck them in at night', the cost of doing so would be small and the goodwill capital gained huge. His point was they should have buried the issue with kindness rather than stonewall. Couldn't agree with him more. He says some weird stuff, but he hit the nail on the head for this issue.

 

[mwalsh]

There is a patent owned by Celgard (a Polypore subsidiary) for a ceramic coated separator for Li-ion batteries going all the way back to 2001. And although the patent addresses shorting more than anything else, I can't imagine it was long before they noted the other properties relevant to us. So I don't think it could be reasonably said that the battery design Nissan ended up using predated this development:

http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6432586/description.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Edit: Oh, and incidentally, Celgard/Polypore is currently suing Sumitomo over this very patent!

http://investor.polypore.net/common/mobile/mobiledetail.cfm?ReleaseID=742767&CompanyID=PPO&MobileID=" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[mwalsh]

I got a chuckle when listening to Jack Rickard when the LEAF Pheonix issues first surfaced. He characterized Nissan as performing corporate hara-kiri but not molly coddling the few customers affected. The bit that made me chuckle is that he said Nissan should drive round the owners homes and offer to 'tuck them in at night', the cost of doing so would be small and the goodwill capital gained huge. His point was they should have buried the issue with kindness rather than stonewall. Couldn't agree with him more. He says some weird stuff, but he hit the nail on the head for this issue.

Couldn't agree with you more. On all points.

 

[TonyWilliams]

It would be interesting if the Volt battery already had a lot of the heat-resistant features of Nissan's proposed "hot battery", and yet GM still chose to put a TMS on the Volt.

Even the most low level TMS that Nissan can add to the car (without any modifications to the actual car), like an insulated battery box and then siphon some cool air from the existing air conditioner compressor (yes, not an original concept... see Mitsubishi iMiev).

Not sure the same level of battery safety can be assured if the battery pack is vented like the iMiev.

I can't remember who it was, but a guest on transport evolved bought an iMiev on the cheap that was flooded in the Hurricane Sandy natural disaster, hoping to be able to coax the battery pack back to life that was at zero volts. Upon opening the battery pack, sea water flooded out, the cells were trashed. The water got in through the vent used to help air cool the pack. Without a sealed pack enclosure a fire cannot be easily contained.

I didn't suggest to unseal the pack. The cooling evaporator is in the sealed battery, and the cold air is circulated.

 

[scottf200]

Lesees I don't have as much concern for - nearly all those cars will be Nissan's problem beginning next year.

Isn't this the leasing companies problem since they own the car and not Nissan corporate? Perhaps I'm confused because I only buy but I thought if the car is sold or leased someone owns it and it is not Nissan (hence the reason lease are counted as sales).

ie. This leasing company has these cars for sale. No Volts or LEAFs because none off leases yet (AFAIK).

http://2623.ecarlist.com/web/inventory/All_years/Nissan/All_models/All_body_types/All_vehicles/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[TonyWilliams]

I got a chuckle when listening to Jack Rickard when the LEAF Pheonix issues first surfaced.... He says some weird stuff, but he hit the nail on the head for this issue.

He claimed the BMS was the problem with a monologue that I did with his show. He also thinks battery packs should not have BMS (what are the odds that his dislike was the problem?).

 

[mwalsh]

Lesees I don't have as much concern for - nearly all those cars will be Nissan's problem beginning next year.

Isn't this the leasing companies problem since they own the car and not Nissan corporate? Perhaps I'm confused because I only buy but I thought if the car is sold or leased someone owns it and it is not Nissan (hence the reason lease are counted as sales).

ie. This leasing company has these cars for sale. No Volts or LEAFs because none off leases yet (AFAIK).

http://2623.ecarlist.com/web/inventory/All_years/Nissan/All_models/All_body_types/All_vehicles/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

All Nissan's "in house" leases are written through NMAC. Nissan by any other name is still Nissan.

 

[TimLee]

The LEAF's after Fukushima were very safe despite being tossed around by the tsunami thanks to sealed pack enclosure.

Where did you get the information for this statement JP? My 2011 LEAF was manufactured the day before the tsunami, and apparently was parked in Oppama awaiting shipment. But wave heights there were very small and no damage was done at Oppama from the reports I read.
Do you have information on LEAFs that did actually experience very high water from the tsunami that would have flooded the battery compartment that survived and were put back into service?

The interesting thing I note from all this is that if the better (but more expensive) separators were available during the design of the existing packs prior to the release of the LEAF, Nissan may have shot themselves (and their customers) in the foot by going the cheaper route. *IF* it can be shown that they chose a cheaper separator rather than use a superior product then do LEAF owners have a claim on the 8yr/100,000 mile warranty for poor workmanship? Not a open and close case because the manufacture maybe faultless, with 'only' the design flawed. I smell a class action if it surfaces they cheaped-out on the battery. Maybe the 5 yr / 60,000 retroactive warranty was more legally CYA motivated than customer relations motivated. Stranger things have happened at sea.

I believe that the old chemistry was fading three to four times faster than the projection given at market launch in 2010.

The 5 yr / 60,000 retroactive warranty was for settlement of the Phoenix owner's class action lawsuit. Not just customer relations / PR motivated.
And that settlement is pretty decent for people in Phoenix and some in Texas, southern FL, and some in Southern CA that will get battery replacements. Some will even get certificates for the new "Hot" battery.
But the more you read and understand about this, is that no one with a 2011 / 2012 / 2013 LEAF has gotten anything near what Nissan expected, and what they were talking about with such enthusiastic marketing.
SAD
The The 5 yr / 60,000 retroactive warranty is leaving a lot of LEAF purchasers, particularly low miles per year drivers, with basically a disposable vehicle at the 7 year mark. Only a battery rental plan that so far sounds financially bad, and not much used vehicle $ for the 7 year old LEAF.
I'm not a lawyer, have no idea about the viability of other class action lawsuits.
But Nissan still has a long way to go to make me happy.

 

[mwalsh]

But Nissan still has a long way to go to make me happy.

I think they're making baby steps. But for my money, someone needs to say, "Oh, what the f**k...just give 'em what they want!"

 

[edatoakrun]

Yesterday I asked on p. 40 of this thread:

edatoakrun

BBrockman

...Currently, we have almost completed testing of a new battery chemistry intended to substantially slow capacity loss in extreme heat. During constant testing at battery temperatures of 45 C/113 F, the new battery chemistry is performing similar to the manner that the current battery performs in temperate areas like San Francisco or Seattle...

If true, then isn't every BEV/PHEV with an ATM battery cooling system now functionally obsolete?

What do the "I will never buy a BEV without ATM", and "The LEAF would be a great car, if it only had ATM" party members have to say in response?

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=13192&start=390" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Since there has still been no coherent response to that question from the it's a "bloodbath" and the "LEAF needs ATM" bloviators posting on this thread, I'll just xpost my own conclusions stated on another thread:

...There really is little question that all BEV batteries will be passively or semi-passively cooled (by fans and/or airflow while driving) at some point in the near-future.

I have always believed that Nissan probably made the correct decision to skip the transitional liquid-cooled-by-AC ATM technology, which is cost-effective only for batteries that are both very expensive and very delicate, neither of which we should expect in the future.

If the new heat-resistant battery lives up to Nissan's projections, and comes out only ~ one year from now, the proof of the superiority of Nissan's approach over that taken by virtually all other BEV manufactures will have come even earlier than I expected.

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=12339&start=30" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[dhanson865]

The interesting thing I note from all this is that if the better (but more expensive) separators were available during the design of the existing packs prior to the release of the LEAF, Nissan may have shot themselves (and their customers) in the foot by going the cheaper route. *IF* it can be shown that they chose a cheaper separator rather than use a superior product then do LEAF owners have a claim on the 8yr/100,000 mile warranty for poor workmanship? Not a open and close case because the manufacture maybe faultless, with 'only' the design flawed. I smell a class action if it surfaces they cheaped-out on the battery. Maybe the 5yr/60,000 retroactive warranty was more legally CYA motivated than customer relations motivated. Stranger things have happened at sea.

But they may have been (depending on how long before manufacture the packs were being designed)...the ceramic separator for the Volt piece I posted a link to dates back to January 2009! And if they knew they were going to use them for the Volt back then, I don't see why they couldn't have been used for the LEAF. Surely someone from Polypore must have said, "You know what..."?

And as for us, we TRUSTED that Nissan had this all sussed out. The least they could do for owners is to make this right, irrespective of where we happen to be when the pack warranty runs out. And if we are so few, that wouldn't hurt Nissan's bottom line so much (not anywhere as much as another class-action - the lawyers who helped me sue Chase billed over $2m in hours, plus what Chase's lawyers billed and the settlement amount).

Lesees I don't have as much concern for - nearly all those cars will be Nissan's problem beginning next year.

I have to wonder if you are naive or just don't care about the used car market. What do you think happens to those returned Leafs? I say they go on the used car market with the existing battery no matter the condition and some poor buyer is on the hook to ask Nissan for a better battery after the fact.

Your leased leaf goes back to a dealer not Nissan corporate. Dealers will do the minimum they can get away with to put that car into another buyers hands.

 

[mwalsh]

I have to wonder if you are naive or just don't care about the used car market. What do you think happens to those returned Leafs? I say they go on the used car market with the existing battery no matter the condition and some poor buyer is on the hook to ask Nissan for a better battery after the fact.

Kind of selfish, I know. But I care about ME as an owner.

Anyone coming to a used LEAF should have done their due diligence. We had no option as early adopters...we had to take Nissan at face value.

 

[dhanson865]

I have to wonder if you are naive or just don't care about the used car market. What do you think happens to those returned Leafs? I say they go on the used car market with the existing battery no matter the condition and some poor buyer is on the hook to ask Nissan for a better battery after the fact.

Kind of selfish, I know. But I care about ME as an owner.

Anyone coming to a used LEAF should have done their due diligence. We had no option as early adopters...we had to take Nissan at face value.

I totally understand that, maybe change the line to avoid using "Nissan's" and instead use "someone elses" in that spot such as:

"Lesees I don't have as much concern for - nearly all those cars will be someone elses problem beginning next year."

I just don't see Nissan corporate replacing every battery in every used car that crosses a dealer lot coming off lease before it gets released or resold.

 

[TonyWilliams]

I just don't see Nissan corporate replacing every battery in every used car that crosses a dealer lot coming off lease before it gets released or resold.

Just as they haven't for the buy backs already made. They just ship them to another part of the USA and sell it, as is.

Caveat emptor.

 

[smkettner]

Only thing left is for the next two bars to drop in the next 22,000 miles.
I think it will be close :|

 

[TomT]

Yep, I'm in the same race...

Only thing left is for the next two bars to drop in the next 22,000 miles.
I think it will be close :|

 

[TonyWilliams]

Yep, I'm in the same race...

Only thing left is for the next two bars to drop in the next 22,000 miles.
I think it will be close :|

I'd say leaving the car in Palm Springs for a month or so at 100% charge next summer should move things in the right direction. Rent a car for a month.

 

[mwalsh]

I just don't see Nissan corporate replacing every battery in every used car that crosses a dealer lot coming off lease before it gets released or resold.

A part of me thinks that would be a smart move though, even though I agree it will never happen. I mean they could certify them and charge a premium as a result, but probably not enough to cover even a refurb pack.

Another option might be complete disclosure. Perhaps with a window sticker on each vehicle indicating pack condition or a realistic expected range given the condition. This may even be where the SYB program is better received - get into a lease return super-cheap and then enter the program. I don't know, I'm just throwing out some ideas.

 

[KJD]

Only thing left is for the next two bars to drop in the next 22,000 miles.
I think it will be close :|

I figure mine will drop 4th bar about 1 year after the warranty expires.