TonyWilliams
Well-known member
thankyouOB said:equating this with the WMD and war with Iraq is just too much.
please.
A bit of a stretch there!!!! I confident that most folks understand the reference (and it wasn't about WMD equals LEAF !!!)
thankyouOB said:equating this with the WMD and war with Iraq is just too much.
please.
OrientExpress said:eHelmholtz said:Nissan has not shown appropriate support for it's early adopters!
Why would you say that?
Likely an echo of a similar discussion on the Volt forum. The consensus there is that Leaf owners deserve to be treated better and that GM approached the adversity they were facing with the Volt more effectively. These are their words, not mine:OrientExpress said:eHelmholtz said:Nissan has not shown appropriate support for it's early adopters!
Why would you say that?
Click to openlarry4pyro said:It looks like it is starting to get ugly over there. I can't recall a time when some of your most ardent customers start talking of class action suits and putting together links to various agencies to file complaints, including the applicable Lemon Laws in the southern states. Nissan's response is baffling, instead of quelling the fears of these supporters, they simply appear to stick their head in the sand and imply that everything is normal. Whether the problem is real or imagined, it is important that the manufacturer address the concerns of its customers, otherwise you risk having your supporters turn on you and the negative publicity will make it difficult to be a player in this segment of the market. These folks deserve to be treated better!
OrientExpress said:Well granted this owners group does seem to have a few more very vocal and seemingly hysterical schizophrenic ADD owners than other marques , but on the whole, they don't represent the vast majority of LEAF owners.
A few owners have an issue with their car, it has not met their expectations, and because of that they are frustrated and for whatever reason are unable to deal with the situation and would rather freak out.
Speculation is rampant, and facts are few. Some have taken to public forums such as this one to fan the flames of discontent in a very trollish manner, and have played right into the hands of those that would prefer for the BEV movement to fail.
Others have tried to understand the problem, and enjoy the challenge, much like playing fantasy football. Their tools are limited and what they are investigating is not well understood, but it certainly is fun to try to figure this out in a positive way, and there are several hypothesis that have been brought forth that are reasonable and possible. When the fix is implemented by Nissan, it will be interesting to see how many had a dog that could hunt.
Meanwhile Nissan has acknowledged that there is an issue and is bringing the full weight of its engineering resources and expertise world-wide to understand what is happening and provide a solution to the issue and to improve their products moving forward. These things take time resolve properly, but for many that is not good enough and demand immediate satisfaction. That lack of patience is disappointing because for every one of those that are vocal advocates of dissatisfaction, there are 600 that are satisfied with their cars or are patient enough and confident enough that Nissan will resolve this. I myself are one of the 600.
Other than assigning wet nurses to the most vocal and impatient of those that are dissatisfied, it is hard to say what more than can be done.
surfingslovak said:The vocal supporters there are unanimous about GM's decision to offer buy-backs to dissatisfied owners in the wake of the Volt fire risk, which broke the news earlier this year.
="OrientExpress"]... I have full confidence that Nissan will resolve this issue in a fair and equitable manner, and will use it as a learning experience to improve their EV products.
Thank you for clarifying that.spike09 said:Don't forget Chevy was not really that forthcoming with the battery pack fire risk. They informed the public of the problem only after the government started a safety defect investigation. The NHTSA informed them about the problem in June 2011. Chevy did nothing until the NHTSA opened a formal safety defect investigation on Nov 25. They kept the problem hidden for 6 months and were lucky no actual real-world incidents occurred. It took them over a month to come up with a fix for a serious safety issue.
Please understand that I was not making a qualitative comparison between the severity of the two problems. That wouldn't make any sense. All I wanted to highlight was the approach taken to quell fear, doubt and uncertainty once the problem broke the news and it was in everyone's mouth.spike09 said:The comparison between the Volt serious safety issue to the Leaf battery capacity loss is weak. A better comparison of the Chevy Volt fires would be to the Fiskar Karma fires, although the battery pack does not seem to be issue with the Karma.
Right, this is becoming more and more apparent. Additionally, manufacturers should not be allowed to market any other range figure but what a standardized EPA test has determined. I'm sure that there are other things that might require proper disclosure, such as the effect of local climate on batteries. We have already seen that with the Prius, where owners in hot locales are getting half or third of the mileage out of their packs compared to more temperate areas. Mind you, the pack is often way past its warranty, yet some folks appear to be dissatisfied because they were not told upfront.spike09 said:It does not seem the Leaf issues even qualify as a defect under the Lemon Law! Perhaps we need specific EV legislation to address Battery Capacity issues!
Well said. While I share your concerns, I'm a bit more hopeful that this can be resolved with a constructive approach from all sides.edatoakrun said:And I would find this outcome quite possibly a much greater disappointment, a few years from now, than if my LEAF loses capacity somewhat faster than I expected, when I bought it.
I don't know if I'm the only one who appreciates your experience with auto manufacturers. That said, I don't see a reason to insult forum contributors just to get the message across.OrientExpress said:While I am not a "tool" of Nissan, I do understand how the process of resolving an issue such as this works, and again I have full confidence that Nissan will resolve this issue in a fair and equitable manner, and will use it as a learning experience to improve their EV products.
You can't expect buyers to own up to a complicated charging process and driving habits if you don't provide them with enough information in the owner's manual to teach them how to do it right in the first place. If Nissan starts out by treating owners like idiots, then idiot-proofing becomes necessary. You reap what you sow.edatoakrun said:I am most concerned that Nissan might alter future BEV sales plans, after concluding that American BEV buyers simply are incapable of understanding the trade-offs, in battery life, and battery use, of vehicle batteries, and cannot exercise judgement in their driving and charging habits, to get their own particular optimum use from their batteries.
Nissan and other BEV manufactures may even move to "idiot-proof" future EV designs for the American market, and take much the same approach GM did with the Volt.
TonyWilliams said:OrientExpress said:Well granted this owners group does seem to have a few more very vocal and seemingly hysterical schizophrenic ADD owners than other marques , but on the whole, they don't represent the vast majority of LEAF owners.
You appear to be a doctor now, making a diagnosis. Listen, obviously MOST LEAF owners don't know or care about something that doesn't affect them directly. That's the human existence. You're a good example. You have your car that is working well for you, and you're obviously happy with it, and it's just tough doo doo for those that don't have the same.
Other than assigning wet nurses to the most vocal and impatient of those that are dissatisfied, it is hard to say what more than can be done.
Thank you for being the "tool" that every forum needs. I'd recommend putting me on your ignore list, because you are an absolute waste of internet space.
OrientExpress said:But still, essentially all of the options that are available to any vehicle owner that are dissatisfied with their car are on the table for LEAF owners.
They can:
Let the manufacturer fix the problem
They can sell or trade-in the car for another one
They can take advantage of their states Lemon Law statutes to recover a pro-rated amount of their investment in the car
They can attempt litigation
While I am not a "tool" of Nissan, I do understand how the process of resolving an issue such as this works, and again I have full confidence that Nissan will resolve this issue in a fair and equitable manner, and will use it as a learning experience to improve their EV products.
Many think there is no comparison to how GM has handled "problems" compared to NISSAN. It was a lab test of a 20 MPH side pole impact in a specific area and happened 3 weeks later in a bone yard and only after manually rotating the vehicle. Karma situations are a different situation altogether -- no crash even. See NHTSAs comments below. Many never got the battery tunnel enh done. I had it done when I got my tires rotated in case it comes up in 10 years if I sell it. It was done promptly and I was given a free rental. The Volt is my first Chevrolet product and GM has impressed me in many ways.spike09 said:It took them over a month to come up with a fix for a serious safety issue.
In describing the incident, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration stated:
"NHTSA has concluded that the crash test damaged the Volt's lithium ion battery and that the damage led to a vehicle fire that took several weeks to develop after the test was completed. That incident—which occurred at the test facility and caused property damage but no injuries—remains the only case of a battery-related fire in a crash or crash test of vehicles powered by lithium-ion batteries, despite a number of other rigorous crash tests of the Chevy Volt separately conducted by both NHTSA and General Motors."
The NHTSA then released this statement regarding the safety of electric vehicles:
"Based on the available data, NHTSA does not believe the Volt or other electric vehicles are at a greater risk of fire than gasoline-powered vehicles. In fact, all vehicles—both electric and gasoline-powered—have some risk of fire in the event of a serious crash. As manufacturers continue to develop vehicles of any kind—electric, gasoline, or diesel—it is critical that they take the necessary steps to ensure the safety of drivers and first responders both during and after a crash."
mksE55 said:Sweet, I will bring the Popcorn , this will be a great show :mrgreen:
surfingslovak said:Right, this is becoming more and more apparent. Additionally, manufacturers should not be allowed to market any other range figure but what a standardized EPA test has determined. I'm sure that there are other things that might require proper disclosure, such as the effect of local climate on batteries.spike09 said:It does not seem the Leaf issues even qualify as a defect under the Lemon Law! Perhaps we need specific EV legislation to address Battery Capacity issues!
Enter your email address to join: