EdmondLeaf
Posts: 1500
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 2:18 pm
Location: Edmond, OK

Re: LEAF advisory group

Thu Jan 24, 2013 3:18 pm

RegGuheert wrote:
Nubo wrote:The rationale for LA-4 that I remember, was because EPA had not quantified a test leading up to the LEAF launch. That rationale is gone. I know it's probably hard to let go of that 100 mile value, but LA-4 doesn't help the US consumer. Maybe it's close to the Japan model, but nowhere close to the market standard here.
I do not think the range number is nearly as critical to the Japanese customers as it is to American customers. The reason is that many of the LEAFs in Japan are right around Yokohama and they have access to a bunch of quick chargers. If the battery gets low, no big deal! Simply plug in for a few minutes and continue to your destination.

Where I live, I do not expect to have that option for quite some time.
Same here so one stick for all is not so good. 100 miles is not reasonable and people complaining. EPA minus reasonable reserve.

DaveinOlyWA
Posts: 14795
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:43 pm
Delivery Date: 16 Nov 2019
Leaf Number: 319862
Location: Olympia, WA
Contact: Website

Re: LEAF advisory group

Thu Jan 24, 2013 3:31 pm

Right and regional differences and the needs for public charging were also one of the topics that will be tackled with this group as well.

Reg is in an area where 40 miles from his home is halfway to nowhere so quick charging is not gonna do anything for him but i am in the puget sound regiofn where most of my destnatins can be just over 50 miles making a fast charge critical
2011 SL; 44,598 mi, 87% SOH. 2013 S; 44,840 mi, 91% SOH. 2016 S30; 29,413 mi, 99% SOH. 2018 S; 25,185 mi, SOH 92.23%. 2019 S Plus; 10,081 mi, 95.03% SOH
My Blog; http://daveinolywa.blogspot.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
RegGuheert
Posts: 6419
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 4:12 am
Delivery Date: 16 Mar 2012
Leaf Number: 5926
Location: Northern VA

Re: LEAF advisory group

Thu Jan 24, 2013 3:39 pm

DaveinOlyWA wrote:Reg is in an area where 40 miles from his home is halfway to nowhere...
:lol:

Well, that all depends on which DIRECTION I drive! In one particular direction, I can drive the LEAF directly into Washington, DC. It's getting home that would make quick charging interesting!
RegGuheert
2011 Leaf SL Demo vehicle
10K mi. on 041413; 20K mi. (55.7Ah) on 080714; 30K mi. (52.0Ah) on 123015; 40K mi. (49.8Ah) on 020817; 50K mi. (47.2Ah) on 120717; 60K mi. (43.66Ah) on 091918.
Enphase Inverter Measured MTBF: M190, M215, M250, S280

User avatar
davewill
Posts: 5083
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011 6:04 pm
Location: San Diego, CA, US

Re: LEAF advisory group

Thu Jan 24, 2013 5:34 pm

RegGuheert wrote:... - Everyone working on the LEAF within Nissan ALWAYS quotes LA4 cycle results when they discuss vehicle range. It is not just marketing and sales doing this, but everyone. Their entire culture seems to be built around this concept that the LA4 range of the vehicles is THE range of the vehicles. Most (all?) of the members of the advisory board found this somewhat disturbing. My personal feeling is that it does not bode well for us to get any changes in how they communicate the capabilities of the car outside of Nissan, but we'll see. I think this needs to be a point for further discussion with them going forward. Would anyone else like to propose a different range for them to use in discussions? Perhaps the EPA five-cycle range test result? ...
I find myself wanting to contact the FTC to request they require carmakers ONLY advertise the EPA number as is done for gas mileage. Cherry picking the number they want is crazy.
2014 Rav4 EV, Blizzard Pearl White
2011 LEAF SL w/QC, Blue Ocean, returned at end of lease

User avatar
surfingslovak
Vendor
Posts: 3809
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 1:35 pm

Re: LEAF advisory group

Thu Jan 24, 2013 6:25 pm

davewill wrote:I find myself wanting to contact the FTC to request they require carmakers ONLY advertise the EPA number as is done for gas mileage. Cherry picking the number they want is crazy.
+1

I think that's likely the only sensible way to approach this, and it would help change the entrenched range "culture" at Nissan and elsewhere in a jiffy. Thank you for the detailed trip and meeting reports. Great and much appreciated read.

User avatar
linkim
Posts: 495
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 5:06 pm
Location: Silicon Valley

Re: A favor from LEAF advisory group

Thu Jan 24, 2013 8:13 pm

OrientExpress wrote:If you guys are at the Nissan Yokohama headquarters today, can you snap a picture of the QC stations that are there at the entrance to the Nissan Gallery? When I was there last month, I forgot to get a shot of them.

Thanks! Sounds like you are having a great time.
I took this pic of the two QCs. Let's see if I can post them here.

[img]QCsHQyokohama[/img]

Edit: Sorry, I don't know what I am doing so will send the pic to OrientExpress by email.
LEAF SL + QC
Reserved: 4/20/10
Received: April 19, 1 year after reservation

cwerdna
Posts: 10526
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 4:31 pm
Delivery Date: 28 Jul 2013
Location: SF Bay Area, CA

Re: LEAF advisory group

Thu Jan 24, 2013 8:16 pm

Not to go too OT...
davewill wrote:I find myself wanting to contact the FTC to request they require carmakers ONLY advertise the EPA number as is done for gas mileage. Cherry picking the number they want is crazy.
While you're at it, maybe you should suggest they outlaw my pet peeve of being able to cherry pick the highest # out of city/highway and combined EPA numbers for ICEVs. As I've posted here and elsewhere:

It should be illegal to cherry pick and advertise only the highest mpg #. If they're going to state only 1, then it should be combined. Otherwise, state all 3 (city/highway/combined) in equal prominence.

'19 Bolt Premier
'13 Leaf SV w/premium package (owned)
'13 Leaf SV w/QC + LED & premium packages (lease over, car returned)

Please don't PM me with Leaf questions. Just post in the topic that seems most appropriate.

Stoaty
Posts: 4490
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 9:50 pm
Delivery Date: 12 Jun 2011
Leaf Number: 3871
Location: West Los Angeles

Re: LEAF advisory group

Thu Jan 24, 2013 9:14 pm

surfingslovak wrote:
davewill wrote:I find myself wanting to contact the FTC to request they require carmakers ONLY advertise the EPA number as is done for gas mileage. Cherry picking the number they want is crazy.
+1
+2
It should be illegal to advertise anything else, and the combined number should be the one advertised for ICE.
2011 Leaf with 62,000 miles given to Nephew
2013 Tesla Model S85 with 251 miles rated range at full charge
Leaf Spy Manual
Battery Aging Model Spreadsheet

User avatar
TonyWilliams
Posts: 10091
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 1:48 am
Location: San Diego
Contact: Website

Re: LEAF advisory group

Thu Jan 24, 2013 9:21 pm

surfingslovak wrote:
davewill wrote:I find myself wanting to contact the FTC to request they require carmakers ONLY advertise the EPA number as is done for gas mileage. Cherry picking the number they want is crazy.
+1

I think that's likely the only sensible way to approach this, and it would help change the entrenched range "culture" at Nissan and elsewhere in a jiffy. Thank you for the detailed trip and meeting reports. Great and much appreciated read.
+++++++One Million

User avatar
JPWhite
Gold Member
Posts: 1784
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 3:41 pm
Delivery Date: 30 Jul 2011
Leaf Number: 5734
Location: Hendersonville TN
Contact: Website Yahoo Messenger AOL

Re: LEAF advisory group

Thu Jan 24, 2013 9:27 pm

TonyWilliams wrote:
surfingslovak wrote:
davewill wrote:I find myself wanting to contact the FTC to request they require carmakers ONLY advertise the EPA number as is done for gas mileage. Cherry picking the number they want is crazy.
+1

I think that's likely the only sensible way to approach this, and it would help change the entrenched range "culture" at Nissan and elsewhere in a jiffy. Thank you for the detailed trip and meeting reports. Great and much appreciated read.
+++++++One Million
Heck I raise you 16 Trillion pluses. If its good enough for Obama it's good enough for me.

Seriously tho, I agree that they should stick to the EPA number. In years gone by the EPA number was optimistic as well, but the recent tests they do are pretty good IMHO.
--
JP White
http://jpwhitenissanleaf.com
2011 Blue SL-e, 132,400 Miles.
Lost 5 Capacity bars
7/18/13 (29,206), 8/25/14 (51,728), 7/12/15 (71.108), 5/12/16 (88,362), 10/17/16 (96,532)
New Battery 12/3/16 (98,956)
2018 Model 3 20,000 Miles.

Return to “General / Main Owners Forum”