Why do you want QC charging for the Leaf?

[garsh]

I've noticed that in many of the threads on this site, some people really want QC charging for their Leafs. Some assert that it is a huge mistake that Ford is not making QC charging available in the Focus Electric.

I don't get it.

It's not going to turn the Leaf into a viable long-range cruiser. How long does it take to charge a Leaf via QC? 30 minutes? So, I could drive for maybe an hour and a half, and then have to stop for a half hour to charge back up. No, I'm not going to start taking my Leaf cross-country just because QC charging is available. QC isn't fast enough yet where it's equivalent to stopping at a gas station for a quick fill-up.

I can see it beginning to be useful on a vehicle like the Tesla Model S. You drive for 5 hours straight, stop for a meal and a QC charge, and repeat. But for vehicles with such a limited capacity as the Leaf, I don't see it being a critical feature.

There are obviously those of you who disagree with me. What scenario do you foresee that makes QC charging in the Leaf worthwhile?

 

[adric22]

It's not going to turn the Leaf into a viable long-range cruiser. How long does it take to charge a Leaf via QC? 30 minutes? So, I could drive for maybe an hour and a half, and then have to stop for a half hour to charge back up. No, I'm not going to start taking my Leaf cross-country just because QC charging is available. QC isn't fast enough yet where it's equivalent to stopping at a gas station for a quick fill-up.

We've had similar threads before. Keep in mind, at highway speeds (which would be expected on a long trip) you won't get an hour and a half of driving between charges. Remember QC typically charges to 80%. So at highway speeds, expect 50 miles or so between charges. That will be much less than an hour driving.

I agree, QC for the Leaf is still not a solution to longer trips. However, I could see it helping for those trips that are just outside of the Leaf's normal range. So that would give the Leaf an effective range of maybe 150 to 200 miles for people who don't mind stopping for the occasional quick charge.

I think for many of us, the higher capacity L2 charger would be of more benefit than QC.

 

[TonyWilliams]

There are obviously those of you who disagree with me. What scenario do you foresee that makes QC charging in the Leaf worthwhile?

You must not own an electric car, or your life is quite "simple" to suggest that the only possibility for EV's should be that they be tethered daily just 35-50 miles from your garage (70-100 miles round trip).

1. You drive 35 miles each way to work, for a total of 70, and after you get home, Johnny calls from 20 miles away and says that you forgot to pick him up from school / church / camp / football. About 15 minutes on the QC makes this possible.

2. It will significantly reduce the need for a "second" car, since the utility of the LEAF (or other 50-150 range car) has been expanded.

3. It expands the depth of penetration of EV's into the general car buyer market. You wouldn't probably buy a gas car if the only place you could get gas was in your garage.

4. In the morning, you wake up to find that your Blink charger failed to charge (or you forgot to plug it), and now you'd have to wait 6 hours (or 18 hours on 120 volts) for the car to get to work. Voila! 30 minutes on the quick charger saves the day.

There are lots more, but if you're not interested in QCing, why would you start this thread?

 

[TomT]

+1

As battery size and range increases, QC becomes more attractive and viable.

I agree, QC for the Leaf is still not a solution to longer trips. However, I could see it helping for those trips that are just outside of the Leaf's normal range. So that would give the Leaf an effective range of maybe 150 to 200 miles for people who don't mind stopping for the occasional quick charge.

 

[smkettner]

To a certain extent I agree with the OP. A realistic 200 mile car would utilize the QC far better on a long trip.
Otherwise L2 at the destination is fine in most cases... especially with 6.6 charging.
I can also see QC for business use where a person is driving much of the day such as taxi or delivery service.
A real road trip of 350 to 700 miles per day is going to be too long for current Leaf-QC IMO.

 

[edatoakrun]

I agree that charging my LEAF at the rate it is designed for offers no advantages.

That's also why I always fill the gas tanks on all my ICEVs with an eyedropper...

 

[TomT]

Well, if you wanted to make a reasonable analogy, this one is actually fairly accurate. L2 does add electrical energy at about the same rate that an eyedropper would add equivalent gasoline energy...

I agree that charging my LEAF at the rate it is designed for offers no advantages.
That's also why I always fill the gas tanks on all my ICEVs with an eyedropper...

 

[smkettner]

I agree that charging my LEAF at the rate it is designed for offers no advantages.

That's also why I always fill the gas tanks on all my ICEVs with an eyedropper...

Except with an eye dropper you have to stand there.
I think most people would pay $1,500 (home fueling station) if they could add 100 miles range to their gasoline car at home paying less than 50 cents per gallon and it had to trickle in overnight.

The 350 mile range would make gasoline stations (QC $4 gal) nearly obsolete.

 

[Aeolus]

I don't know whether to characterize this post as silly, ignorant, or malevolent.

As a LEAF owner, if I want to travel longer distances, I will fly, take a train, or switch cars with someone else in my family. Criticizing a LEAF for not being a long distance cruiser is like attacking a frog for not having gills.

But I would love to see a network of QC stations in the LA Basin and in San Diego that would increase my range from an hour and a half of driving to two and a half hours of driving. And for most of the trips in my normal range, I would only be stopping for ten or twenty minutes to get the extra range that I need.

Simultaneously, a QC network would help if my L2 charging plans don't work, if my plans change during the day or if some series of Sigalerts severely interrupts the SoCal traffic system.

I have been extremely satisfied with my LEAF and its range. And when I went hiking in the Grand Canyon, my wife was delighted to drive it for a week in exchange for her gas-guzzling Prius.

 

[edatoakrun]

Well, if you wanted to make a reasonable analogy, this one is actually fairly accurate. L2 does add electrical energy at about the same rate that an eyedropper would add equivalent gasoline energy...

I agree that charging my LEAF at the rate it is designed for offers no advantages.
That's also why I always fill the gas tanks on all my ICEVs with an eyedropper...

Yes, and if I owned my own gas station that fueled my ICEVs at that rate, at a hugely reduced cost for the gas, i would certainly put the eyedropper in at night, to fuel up my ICEVs, and fuel up at gas stations only when I made longer trips.

But the idea that slow charging on L2 is just as good as fast charging for BEV range extension, is just too ludicrous to take seriously.

L2 is for overnight off-peak charging, and for certain limited other applications, such as for those whose daily driving exceeds charge range, who will want to arrange for a dedicated daytime L2 charge.

The freedom of BEV owners to travel longer ranges is entirely dependent on the public fast-charge infrastructure. This is such an obvious reality, it is not questioned in any other advanced nation, all of which have committed resources to this economic priority.

 

[LEAFfan]

First of all, it takes LESS than 30 minutes to 80%. With QC, I will be able to travel to Tucson (1 stop/less than 30 mins.), Sedona, ( 1 stop), Flagstaff (2 short stops), and even CA (3-4 QCs). I don't drive 75mph (more like 60-65) on trips and since I'm in no hurry and need to stretch every hour and 15mins. or so, use the restroom, eat a snack, etc., it will be great! I've been driving over 9000 miles so far and haven't paid even a penny for electricity.
If other people want to get somewhere fast and burn their gasoline, pollute the planet, give their hard-earned money to Big Oil/foreign countries, that's their choice.

 

[Stoaty]

That's also why I always fill the gas tanks on all my ICEVs with an eyedropper...

Don't you get tired of standing there for hours on end? Aren't you worried about your prolonged exposure to gasoline fumes? What do you do if the eyedropper breaks? :lol:

 

[Electric4Me]

Plus there's the results of the study in Japan that found that the mere existence of DCFCs got people to relax about their range and get out and use their BEVs more. Even if they weren't using them that much.

I can say that when a network is finally built up around the SF Bay Area it will have this effect on me, and to an even greater extent, my wife.

 

[JeremyW]

What scenario do you foresee that makes QC charging in the Leaf worthwhile?

My scenario is a one stop along the way QC to make ~100 mile trips at highway speeds with significant elevation changes. I love snowboarding, and getting to the mountain from southern California is a big deal to me. Fortunately, there is a quick charge station at the base of the San Bernardino mountains. A typical snowboarding trip consists of ~60 miles at freeway speeds to the base, a quick breakfast, then about 40 miles to the slopes. In this case I would use the QC during my breakfast, and it would not significantly impact my trip time.

On the way back, I could do another QC on the way back down (and stop for a snack!) to give me a little bit of extra range on the freeway. I could also do Level 1 at the mountain, but being careful to only go to 80% so I could still use regen.

The other trip that Southern Californians would like to see possible is a trip to Vegas. You'd probably need two or three QC's to do it, but if it was cheaper than gas, I could see a lot of us youngins trying to get out there this way. A LOT of people around here use "the trip to vegas" as a standard of metric. At the very least, think of QC as a very powerful marketing tool to the uninformed that think charging an electric car takes forever. Remember these are folks that think you have to drive somewhere to get your fill up.

And before Tony butts in with "just drive the Prius" if this isn't viable/too expensive, I have no intentions of buying a second car. My other option is to hitch a ride with friends driving an ICE up, and split the fuel charge. I'd pay up to $50 for a set of QC's to get me there and back, as I pay more than this in gas to make the same trip already.

Jeremy

 

[timhebb]

I posted the following (quoted) comments on another forum recently, but they are equally relevant here, so I'm reposting:

"Just to communicate a different point of view: I've had my Leaf over a year now, living near downtown Los Angeles where I'm surrounded by dozens of public L2 charging locations. They are my primary charging resource. I don't even have an L2 installed at home - if I need to charge at home, trickle charging works fine for me. For me, L2 charging IS quick charging.

The imminent 6.6kW vehicle charging standard will dramatically narrow the gap between the L2 and L3 charging experiences. And, when the cost differential is factored in, L3 becomes far less attractive as an option. Finally, the "format war" between CHAdeMo and SAE is inevitably going to continue to muddy the waters and, in the short term at least, discourage L3 deployment.

IMHO, adoption of EV's would be greatly accelerated if EV drivers and potential drivers could get over an unrealistic insistence on ubiquitous L3 charging, and accept the very useable parameters of 6.6kW L2 charging. A little more flexibility will get us all much farther down the road toward the end of the ICE age."

I agree with the Aeolus who bemoans those who criticize the frog for not having gills. Current battery technology simply does not support BEV's as long-range vehicles, no matter how many L3 chargers there are on the planet. Let's just get over it and get on with adopting the existing technology to the 90%+ of applications for which it IS suited. In the meantime, I feel confident that dramatic battery advances are on the way, and we'll see them soon enough.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

just to reiterate what i am guessing many have already said or are about to say ( i open several links at once and sometimes its 20-45 minutes before i respond)

it takes a 75 mile car that can handle 90% of everyone's driving needs and turns it into a 120-150 mile car that can handle 97% of people's average needs.

it allows me to take unexpected trips even if i was unprepared for it. it allows other less informed EVers to feel more comfortable about what they can do with their Leaf and where they can go.

as for me? i have 16 months on my Leaf and have never QC'd and have really only been in a few situations where QC would have been nice so having the option to drive to near the limit of your range, then spend 30 minutes to get most of that range back so you can drive home is INVALUABLE.

i am guessing you dont have an EV and have not had the pleasure of sitting in your car browsing MNL because you still had an hour of charging to go after you had finished up your business right?

well i have. does that make me regret the Leaf? no
am i upset that i had to spend the time doing this? no
if i had to do it all over again, would i buy a Leaf?

well, of course i would! of that there is no doubt

 

[garsh]

You must not own an electric car, or your life is quite "simple" to suggest that the only possibility for EV's should be that they be tethered daily just 35-50 miles from your garage (70-100 miles round trip).

Easy there, Tony. Calm down.

1. You drive 35 miles each way to work, for a total of 70, and after you get home, Johnny calls from 20 miles away and says that you forgot to pick him up from school / church / camp / football. About 15 minutes on the QC makes this possible.

2. It will significantly reduce the need for a "second" car, since the utility of the LEAF (or other 50-150 range car) has been expanded.

3. It expands the depth of penetration of EV's into the general car buyer market. You wouldn't probably buy a gas car if the only place you could get gas was in your garage.

4. In the morning, you wake up to find that your Blink charger failed to charge (or you forgot to plug it), and now you'd have to wait 6 hours (or 18 hours on 120 volts) for the car to get to work. Voila! 30 minutes on the quick charger saves the day.

1. I would take my ICE instead - 0 minute wait. Johnny's football coach won't appreciate waiting 15 minutes for your car to charge.
2. QC doesn't raise the utility of a Leaf enough for me to choose a Leaf over an ICE if I could only have one vehicle. But I suppose if you rarely need to go ~140 miles, and you know that there will be QC charging on that route, that it could be a selling feature.
3. If I could charge my vehicle in 5-10 minutes, sure. But I just don't think the general public is going to see 30-minute charging to be as convenient as stopping at a gas station, and therefore it won't help much.
4. ...and you have enough juice left to get to a QC station. Ok, I can see that being good piece-of-mind.

There are lots more, but if you're not interested in QCing, why would you start this thread?

I started it because I *am* interested in these other scenarios! I have no other motive. It doesn't sound useful to me, so I wanted others to tell me why they believe it to be useful, that's all.

 

[mwalsh]

Knowing I could almost certainly QC near home made it a very easy decision recently to go to the office early and come back to my city for a meeting, rather than going to the meeting first and going into my office in the afternoon for only a half-day. The only other alternative to the half-day of work would have been taking one of the ICE vehicles instead. But then I wouldn't have had the advantage of the HOV lane to jam back and forth in. So two thumbs up for QC!

 

[garsh]

I don't know whether to characterize this post as silly, ignorant, or malevolent.

Yikes!
Did you read the OP with an open mind? Or did you have preconceived notions of my motivations?

As a LEAF owner, if I want to travel longer distances, I will fly, take a train, or switch cars with someone else in my family. Criticizing a LEAF for not being a long distance cruiser is like attacking a frog for not having gills.

I bought my Leaf to be my daily commuter vehicle, and for local usage. I was NOT criticizing the leaf for not being a long distance cruiser. But I *don't* believe that QC charging turns it into a long distance cruiser, and therefore I was wondering why people find QC charging to be useful in a Leaf.

But I would love to see a network of QC stations in the LA Basin and in San Diego that would increase my range from an hour and a half of driving to two and a half hours of driving. And for most of the trips in my normal range, I would only be stopping for ten or twenty minutes to get the extra range that I need.

A ten-minute wait for the additional range seems reasonable, as long as it's a route that I don't travel often. If I had to do it every day, I'd rather pay for a BEV with more range, or stick with an ICE. Thanks!

 

[ztanos]

1. I would take my ICE instead - 0 minute wait. Johnny's football coach won't appreciate waiting 15 minutes for your car to charge.

I would just not forget Johnny. Planning ahead is important.