Phila. Auto Show - Leaf range

[adric22]

yeah, I think the Leaf might have gotten more range than they allowed for. This is what they said:

In the interest of safety we start looking for a convenient place to stop when the distance-to-empty gauge (DTE) drops to 5 miles. Any vehicles that make it back to the start are halted there. In every case the cars are trailered back to our metered Level-2 charge port so we can determine consumption. Any remaining DTE miles are added back in to determine the total range.

So basically, if I interpret this correctly, when the Leaf said 5 miles remaining, they found a place to pull over and stop. Then they took whatever range the car had managed to accomplish and added 5 miles to that. Now I don't personally have any experience with this area since the lowest number I think I've ever seen on my Leaf was 6 miles, but from what people on here have said, it sounds like they might have gotten an additional 3-5 miles out of the car over and above what they rated it for.

[surfingslovak]

So, numbers are good only when explained with real-life scenarios. I too am irritated that Nissan would throw out that 100 miles range without explaining to people that this would be a best-case scenario.

I noticed in the BMW i3 article I read today that they wisely call the range "60-90" on electricity, and some number over 200 miles with the 2 cylinder motorcycle engine option.

I believe the REx comes online at 20% SOC, so the all-electric range will definitely be less than 100 miles. It's not clear yet, which drive modes will be available, or if the REx can be disabled. The rated battery capacity is rumored to be 23 kWh, and judging by what they did with the MINI-E and ActiveE, about 87% will be usable. If you factor in discharge inefficiency, we are looking at about 19 - 20 kWh availble to the driver. The i3 is rumored to be more efficient, but even then, 100 EV miles would be a best-case scenario.

[surfingslovak]

Now I don't personally have any experience with this area since the lowest number I think I've ever seen on my Leaf was 6 miles, but from what people on here have said, it sounds like they might have gotten an additional 3-5 miles out of the car over and above what they rated it for.

Yes, they didn't drive to turtle, like I originally assumed. They simply did, what an average novice driver would do too: trust the GOM to the letter. While they underestimated the true range of the LEAF by about 4 to 5 miles, the same thing can be probably said of all the other EVs too. Depending on how much padding these cars had at low SOC, and how inaccurate their GOM was. For example, the driver community has learned that the ActiveE has about 3-5 miles left when the GOM shows three dashes. I believe the Fit EV has some reserve too, but I'm not all too familiar with others. Not a very scientific test, but they wanted a real-world comparison.

[TonyWilliams]

This was interesting:

2012 Toyota RAV4 EV --7.7 seconds (0-60mph) 4,042 pounds measured
2012 BMW ActiveE ---- 9.5 seconds (0-60mph) 4,074 pounds measured

My big tank can haul all the kids and their "stuff", smoke the ActiveE in a straight line acceleration, all at the same weight with 30% more battery and range.

[cwerdna]

Yes, they didn't drive to turtle, like I originally assumed. They simply did, what an average novice driver would do too: trust the GOM to the letter. While they underestimated the true range of the LEAF by about 4 to 5 miles, the same thing can be probably said of all the other EVs too. Depending on how much padding these cars had at low SOC, and how inaccurate their GOM was. For example, the driver community has learned that the ActiveE has about 3-5 miles left when the GOM shows three dashes. I believe the Fit EV has some reserve too, but I'm not all too familiar with others. Not a very scientific test, but they wanted a real-world comparison.

Yeah, I don't like how they trusted the GOM and also later used it to add back miles. They should've taken each to turtle, even if they had to deviate a little once they reached their safety threshold.

[surfingslovak]

Yeah, I don't like how they trusted the GOM and also later used it to add back miles. They should've taken each to turtle, even if they had to deviate a little once they reached their safety threshold.

Yes, there is no way of knowing how far the car will go without a date with the turtle

My big tank can haul all the kids and their "stuff", smoke the ActiveE in a straight line acceleration, all at the same weight with 30% more battery and range.

Yes, that is odd. I was going to say that it's because the RAV4 had a big honking motor from the Model S, but it doesn't look like it? If the spec sheet was right, then the RAV4 motor has 10% lower peak power, but 10% higher maximum torque. The ActiveE is just a mule for the i3 powertrain, which is supposed to be 1/3 lighter. Be that as it may, the RAV4 is a mightily tempting EV.

[evnow]

I'd take a corporate message of "between 60 and 80". EVs are simply "between". Unlike gas engines which deliver roughly the same mpg no matter what the weather, EVs are touchy due to climate and how heavy you are with the pedal.

There is a lot of variability with ICE as well - just that it is a lot more difficult to notice (esp. older cars that don't show mpg). Just see all the variation in Prius (or CMax !).

[cwerdna]

I'd take a corporate message of "between 60 and 80". EVs are simply "between". Unlike gas engines which deliver roughly the same mpg no matter what the weather, EVs are touchy due to climate and how heavy you are with the pedal.

There is a lot of variability with ICE as well - just that it is a lot more difficult to notice (esp. older cars that don't show mpg). Just see all the variation in Prius (or CMax !).

With ICEVs, there can be plenty of variability but not necessarily due to weather, generally it's city vs. highway driving along w/other variables like trip length and amount of idling. Short trips w/lots of idling kills mileage.

However, weather can cause what seems like more noticeable mpg variation due to measuring mpg instead of "gallonage". See http://priuschat.com/threads/car-and-dr ... nts.95536/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. A 50 mpg drop to 45 mpg sounds huge, but in terms of gallonage, it's not as big as a 20 to 19 mpg drop. Yet, someone w/a 20 mpg vehicle might dismiss a 1 mpg delta.

[Boomer23]

I took a look at the official Nissan site, looking for that 100 mile range claim, and as far as I can see, it's nowhere to be seen.

Instead, under range, they show the rainbow of curves with ranges from 62 miles to 138 miles depending on listed, clickable driving conditions.

I don't recall whether the equivalent web page previously touted 100 miles, but it doesn't appear to now.

http://www.nissanusa.com/leaf-electric- ... ection_nav" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[cwerdna]

^^^
I understand, but the issue at hand is that Nissan's reps at auto shows at their booth were (in late 2012) and now still apparently telling people the Leaf's range is 100 miles. I've overheard it at the auto show I went to and others have heard/overheard as well, at their auto shows.

I do recall that the older Leaf site back in the '11 model year (and possibly before it was even available for sale) listed similar or the same scenarios w/the same caveats.

I don't mind if somebody uses the 100-mile figure as long as they put it into context.

The problem is that it is almost never put into context, at least not by someone trying to sell you the car.

Yep!

I'm irritated by this as well. I had a similar experience with a Nissan rep at the LA Auto Show while I was having a conversation with someone interested in the LEAF. I try not to be bias when it comes to talking about the LEAF when people ask me about the car. I shared the information I had about my experiences, both good and bad. When we were talking about range, the rep must have been eavesdropping because she butted in and insisted that the LEAF will get 100 miles in range, and if I couldn't get 100 miles in range, then it was my poor driving habits. I think this is a pretty good example of how Nissan treats new car buyers AND existing owners, and it really is a shame.

Sigh.... it ought to be a requirement that ANY of those reps who say that (esp, "100 miles, on average" ) be forced to try to get 100 miles on a charge esp. in winter and w/some highway driving thrown in there. I suspect none of them have actually tried.