Has anyone done that yet? I would think the Arizona Leafs would be a great testbed for that hypothesis, as they represent a time-accelerated sample of what is going to happen to all Leaf batteries eventually.drees wrote: Mark Perry stated exactly that a number of times - if you find capacity low at some point you'd be able to "refresh" your pack by replacing the weakest ones and get a good bump in capacity.
Me too, although I leased because I knew that the current Leaf had the 3.3 kW charger and other cars had 6.6 kW, so I figured it was only a matter of time before the Leaf had 6.6 kW, which is going to be the case in the 2013 MY. I was also suprised at how many purchased, but I took it as a reassuring sign of their confidence in the car.edatoakrun wrote:Speaking for myself, I leased, in no small part, due to uncertainty as to how The LEAF could handle a rural mountainous region with few public charging opportunities. When I discovered how well my LEAF handled this challenge, I bought simply because the lease rate offered by Nissan was just too high. With the current low lease rates and high residuals, I would probably lease, if I were making the same choice today.OrientExpress wrote:On the topic of Lease v. Buy
I was as surprised as Nissan was of the large number of individuals that bought this 1st generation car rather than leasing it. To me it seemed illogical that anyone would buy into a first generation highly complex electronic product that had no track record like the LEAF, knowing full well, that it would be superseded by future generations that were cheaper, better, etc...
I purchased instead of leasing, because I do not mind owning vehicles for 10+ years. The 2011 had the features that were sufficient for my needs. I did not see a need for a faster charger, etc. I charge mainly on my L2 at home. But one of the main reasons behind purchasing instead of leasing was my understanding at the time of purchase that the range would be 70% after 10 years, which would work for my normal daily commute. If I had known that after 5 years I can expect 76% capacity driving 7500 miles per year and 50%?? after 10 years driving 12000 miles/year , I would have not purchased the LEAF, but purchased another vehicle suitable for the AZ climate and my "above average" annual mileage of 12,000 miles per year.OrientExpress wrote:On the topic of Lease v. Buy
I was as surprised as Nissan was of the large number of individuals that bought this 1st generation car rather than leasing it. To me it seemed illogical that anyone would buy into a first generation highly complex electronic product that had no track record like the LEAF, knowing full well, that it would be superseded by future generations that were cheaper, better, etc.,
Now granted, that bet has worked out for the vast majority of buyers, but still, if you want to get in on the leading edge of a new high-priced product category, leasing is the norm for any sort of evolving technology. I know that is not much of a consolation for those of you that did buy your LEAFs, but still there is nothing holding you back from selling or trading your LEAF at some point when you feel it makes sense to jump to the latest version.
Essentially the LEAF 1 is the equivalent of the original iPhone. It is a perfectly fine product that worked as design, but was quickly superseded by better and cheaper technology.
On the topic of upgrades
The number one ask by buyers of high tech products is if there is an upgrade path for that product. And most high tech products have a modular approach to them that in theory would allow for more current module to be used at a point in the future.
But in reality, when it comes to actually upgrading a product, time and time again, the actual take rate for that upgrade is incredibly low simply because technology advances and cost reductions simply made moving to the technology duJour more appealing than upgrading.
If you survey the automotive landscape, I don't think you will be hard pressed to find any manufacturer that offers any sort of upgrade for any automobile today. It just does not make business sense in most cases.
But with that said, if Nissan chooses not offer some sort of "rejuvenation" program for LEAFs down the line, that simply represents a business opportunity for a 3rd party to fill that niche need. I firmly believe that someone will offer solution in the next 2 ~3 years. This one is another "Be patient and stay tuned" item.
Absolutely. I forgot to mention this aspect above, but have been hammering it in a broader context with folks at Nissan and the industry in general. More realistic range information to begin with (I commented to one Nissan exec yesterday that "any statement remotely close to '100 miles per charge' needs to be abolished from your company, your people, and all LEAF marketing.") climate-based expectations as appropriate, etc.Stoaty wrote: Hi Chelsea, I thought the video was a good start to providing more info. This homework is excellent. There is one question missing, though:
5) When is Nissan going to start marketing the car with more specific information, not just giving those of us on the forum that info? I imagine it is particularly galling for those in Arizona to see the Leaf marketed in exactly the same way in Arizona after all of the info about lost capacity. It seems to me that when you are in a hole, the first thing to do is to stop digging.
Thank YOUevchels wrote:... I commented to one Nissan exec yesterday that "any statement remotely close to '100 miles per charge' needs to be abolished from your company, your people, and all LEAF marketing."
Well the answer to the first part is easy...the distrust built into the community over lease practices.Volusiano wrote:Maybe my question is a dumb one, but if Nissan has preferred that people would lease the LEAF instead of buying it, then why didn't they just offer the lease option only and not offer any buy option?
Or at least make the lease term a lot more attractive than the buy term.