135 mile range LEAF? Where did this come from?

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Cash price might be more intimidating vs the monthly lease.
Also consider the resale value of a 40 mile vs 90 mile LEAF at the 5 year mark.
Or the ability to drive 8 to 12 years vs 5.
 
Perhaps just so much fluff, but another reference to Nissan "speeding up"

http://seekingalpha.com/article/2114933-nissan-speeds-up-with-electric-cars-causing-competition-for-tesla" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
smkettner said:
Also consider the resale value of a 40 mile vs 90 mile LEAF at the 5 year mark.
Or the ability to drive 8 to 12 years vs 5.
+1 Also, smaller depth-of-discharge with each trip.

More range is simply better.

The only drawbacks are cost and weight. In my mind the additional range would win out over both.
 
Pure speculation; but, hope:

http://www.thestreet.com/story/12554189/1/nissan-to-extend-electric-car-leadership-with-135-mile-leaf.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
fotajoye said:
Pure speculation; but, hope:

http://www.thestreet.com/story/12554189/1/nissan-to-extend-electric-car-leadership-with-135-mile-leaf.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That's the same story that started the thread. But yeah, hope springs eternal.
 
Definitely GM 200/Tesla E effect. Let's see that new chemistry to pull it off, Nissan!
And the 2011 Leaf swap price, eh?
 
mwalsh said:
klapauzius said:
Bigger battery, same chemistry, will degrade as fast in the heat as a smaller one? I thought it was established, that heat beats cycle losses by wide margin?

That would be something of a turn-off for me. Though, on the flip side, it would take a heck of a lot longer to negatively impact me, based on continuing with the same commute I have now.
Please don't assume that no changes, other than more capacity, will be made if and when Nissan decides to phase in a new battery pack. Nissan has been very conservative on the battery front, and according to Andy Palmer, did not plan to make many mid-cycle revisions. LG Chem has used a ceramic-coated separator, which forms the essence of the heat-resistant battery design, with great success in the Volt for several years now. They have also increased the capacity of the battery pack in the 2013 model year by 3%. While Nissan has not implemented any such changes since the market introduction of the LEAF in 2010, they have reportedly been tinkering with a much more substantial change. These reports go as far back as 2009. The question is not if, but when it will happen, and how exactly will a new battery be productized and priced.
batteryproblemmnl
 
Results of March ePOLL


Would you buy a Tesla electric car if it is priced less than $35,000US?

Results To Date
Yes: 4696
No: 68
Don't Know 80
Total: 4844
 
surfingslovak said:
LG Chem has used a ceramic-coated separator, which forms the essence of the heat-resistant battery design, with great success in the Volt for several years now.
The ceramic coated separator serves mainly to keep the anode/cathode separated and improves the durability of the battery in extremely high temperatures by keeping the separator from breaking down leading to catastrophic failure. This does not seem to be an issue that the LEAFs cells have.

There are two primary modes of capacity loss in lithium batteries and that is the growth of the SEI layer on the negative electrode along with oxidation of the electrolyte.

As the SEI layer grows, this increases the internal resistance of the cell - this effect tends to be greatest when the cell is new and tapers off as the cell ages and the SEI layer thickens.

On the negative electrode charging the battery causes the electrolyte to oxidize - this effect tends to be linear (does not slow down as the pack ages) and is oxidation happens faster at high cell voltages and high temperatures.

In the LEAF, electrolyte oxidation is probably the major component of capacity loss given the high correlation to temperature and the fact that capacity loss does not appear to slow down at all over time.

All covered in the video referenced here:
Why do lithium batteries die and how to improve them?
 
drees said:
surfingslovak said:
LG Chem has used a ceramic-coated separator, which forms the essence of the heat-resistant battery design, with great success in the Volt for several years now.
The ceramic coated separator serves mainly to keep the anode/cathode separated and improves the durability of the battery in extremely high temperatures by keeping the separator from breaking down leading to catastrophic failure. This does not seem to be an issue that the LEAFs cells have.

There are two primary modes of capacity loss in lithium batteries and that is the growth of the SEI layer on the negative electrode along with oxidation of the electrolyte.

As the SEI layer grows, this increases the internal resistance of the cell - this effect tends to be greatest when the cell is new and tapers off as the cell ages and the SEI layer thickens.

On the negative electrode charging the battery causes the electrolyte to oxidize - this effect tends to be linear (does not slow down as the pack ages) and is oxidation happens faster at high cell voltages and high temperatures.

In the LEAF, electrolyte oxidation is probably the major component of capacity loss given the high correlation to temperature and the fact that capacity loss does not appear to slow down at all over time.

All covered in the video referenced here:
Why do lithium batteries die and how to improve them?
Yes, thank you, Dave. I think we might be forgetting another aspect of ceramic-coated separators. It's their excellent wettability, which permits the use a high content of PC and EC in liquid electrolytes. That's very helpful when trying to increase the cycleability of lithium-ion batteries at high temperatures. The extreme thermal stability this separator offers directly leads to excellent temperature tolerance, which is critical to large-size Li-ion batteries.

Yes, temperature-related safety issues are mostly related to the dimensional shrinking or melting of the separator, but wettability is also important, since it facilitates electrolyte composition, which is better suited for high-temperature environments. We have already learned earlier, before Prof. Dahn's excellent lecture, that electrolyte additives can play a crucial role in improving life cycle peformance in high temperature environments. I believe that it was mwalsh, who has unearthed the fact that Nissan will likely transition to a ceramic-coated separator when the development of the "hot battery" was discussed.

That said, I don't think that it's appropriate to turn this thread into a discussion of the chemistry changes, which might or might not be coming. Based on the press reports, it appears that Nissan could have been working on this for some time. The point being, if and when a larger battery arrives, it could incorporate a number of other changes and tweaks, including those that would improve the performance in high-temperature environments. I would not automatically assume that a longer-range LEAF would simply contain more cells and have a physically larger battery pack. Is that fair enough to say?

drees said:
In the LEAF, electrolyte oxidation is probably the major component of capacity loss given the high correlation to temperature and the fact that capacity loss does not appear to slow down at all over time.
I just noticed this, and have to disagree with the notion that capacity loss does not slow down over time. If you look at Stoaty's model, it implies dependency on square root of time, and it does slow down. A slight curve might be imperceptible to the casual observer, especially if it's not tracked or properly plotted, but this does not mean that the relationship between time and capacity loss was linear.

I appreciate your efforts to get more information on this, and help debunk this, but here I have to disagree. The whole purpose of collecting data and the work Stoaty has put into it, was to have a model based on empirical data, which would allow us to project the life cycle of the battery with greater accuracy.

stoatysmodel14years

2011/2012 LEAF Projected Capacity Loss over 14 Years (Stoaty's Model with Default Assumptions)
 
GregH said:
Berlino said:
dhanson865 said:
Looking at that quote I'd be thinking the charger has to be at least 10KW for a 48KW battery.

Many areas have few public L2 charging stations capable of pumping out > 7.2kW. Sure, you can install whatever you want at home, but you don't need 17kW to recharge overnight.

I think there's a diminishing return for on-board L2 chargers > 7.2kW.
Unfortunately I'd have to agree. Anyone know what percentage of EVSEs out in the wild can actually support more than 30-32A? I would think the Tesla or RAV4 folks would track this somewhere.

What part of "lead" do you not understand? :)

You don't lead the market by conforming to existing EVSEs, you lead the market by upgrading the charger in mass production so higher power EVSEs can be used.

This isn't about how long it takes to charge (that is more in the realm of an L3), this is more about Nissan wanting to be able to claim leadership rights.

Now you could easily argue it isn't important, I'm not arguing that it is. I'm just saying the message in that video is that Nissan wants to lead the EV market and a significantly slower on board charger doesn't speak to leadership in my books.
 
dhanson865 said:
What part of "lead" do you not understand? :)

You don't lead the market by conforming to existing EVSEs, you lead the market by upgrading the charger in mass production so higher power EVSEs can be used.

This isn't about how long it takes to charge (that is more in the realm of an L3), this is more about Nissan wanting to be able to claim leadership rights.

Now you could easily argue it isn't important, I'm not arguing that it is. I'm just saying the message in that video is that Nissan wants to lead the EV market and a significantly slower on board charger doesn't speak to leadership in my books.
Nissan is leading deploying DCQC CHAdeMO. GM, BMW, VW and the rest of the CCS block talks but won't put their money where their mouth is. No CCS deployment. That's how not to lead.

L2 chargers don't need to be significantly faster. That's like saying all gas stations need to upgrade when you come out with every new car. Not practical.

Nissan and Tesla are currently the only serious players.
 
dm33 said:
Nissan and Tesla are currently the only serious players.

and which do you consider to be the leader?

Maybe Nissan will pull out something more innovative next go round but for now Tesla looks to be the leader with Nissan playing 2nd.
 
dhanson865 said:
dm33 said:
Nissan and Tesla are currently the only serious players.
and which do you consider to be the leader?

Maybe Nissan will pull out something more innovative next go round but for now Tesla looks to be the leader with Nissan playing 2nd.
I would consider Nissan to be the leader based on worldwide sales of BEV priced at a level a large segment of the population can afford. Once they are competing in the same price segment we will see who comes out as the future leader.
 
I'd rank (on BEV only!):
1.Tesla
2.Nissan
3.BMW
...
...
...further down...
...
...
Ford
GM

:lol:

I hope BMW comes out with an "i5" soon...
 
For those who don't know Anon - couple of points.

- He drives a Volt
- He is basing his 135 miles on 150 miles Nissan asked in the survey (-10% for the reason he doesn't know 150 was stated to be EPA range)
- Year is based on a guess as to when Nissan needs to bring this big battery out to be competitive

No new information. Just speculation.
 
Nothing wrong with Volt drivers! Unless they wish to stir up trouble of course. Don't really want a 150mile battery at this point. I would go order a new one tomorrow if they unveiled the heat resistant battery. Range wise would just be happy with a true 100 mile range, but even in the Leaf's current form it would meet my needs for at least 2 decades. 150 miles would blow my socks off. :lol: I will take any increase they give me though.
 
Stoaty said:
DaveinOlyWA said:
most people are happy with the LEAFs range, degradation included.
Perhaps those that live in the Pacific Northeast are happy with range, degradation included, but those of us in the rest of the country... not so much. That is actually the only significant thing that makes me unhappy about the Leaf.

i think we are too close to the problem for one. we magnify any issue for two. there are people in your neighborhood that are happy with the LEAFs range but simply dont feel the need to express themselves on a public forum.

read my post again. not saying there is no market for longer range (especially since I am in that market!) just saying it wont be the biggest segment of the market by a long shot is all

our society has insured that the public with less money far outweigh the public with more
 
DaveinOlyWA said:
i think we are too close to the problem for one. we magnify any issue for two. there are people in your neighborhood that are happy with the LEAFs range but simply dont feel the need to express themselves on a public forum.
I doubt it - I bet you find that people who are dissatisfied with the LEAFs rate of capacity loss and resulting range outnumber the people who are satisfied with the LEAFs range significantly.
 
LTLFTcomposite said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdBEb9OZ-kg

Skip to the 7:00 mark.

I agree the article is total speculation. At the same time I think we're witnessing the "Tesla effect".
Funny you'd mention the Tesla affect & pair it with the 7:00 mark talking about Nissan's leadership with EV's ??

2014 Sales: Feb March
Nissan Leaf 1425 1252
Tesla Model S 1400 1300

Take the last 2 months sales, and Tesla has sold more than Nissan ... tho the're pretty close, month to month. Then, if you disregard that fact, and you simply compare the 2 car's features ... I duno ... sure the tesla costs a bunch more ... but you get a bunch more too. Leadership? Looking at battery temp management, degradation, range, handling, comfort, responsiveness to owners, range, styling ... hmm ... let me think about this leadership thing ...
:D
As to where the OP got the 135 mile range - it came from a good shake on the magic 8 ball.

Ask_74370c_526425.jpg

.
 
Back
Top