Nissan Asks “How Much of a Premium Would You Pay For a 150-Mile EPA-Rated LEAF?”

[jerry33]

Depends on what part of the country. Here is Phx, it is not uncommon to have 50 - 70 mile commutes just for work. (Mine is 60). Then tack on evening errands, dinner, etc, and you are already at 100 miles.

Bingo. I suspect that those averages that get quoted also include people who only drive their car on the weekend and commute to work by train. If you drive 200 miles on the weekend your daily average is less than 30 miles a day over the week, but that average has nothing to do with the range you require.

 

[ggies07]

I really hope Nissan gets it right with their next LEAF around the time the Gen III is released to make a one-two punch to the oil industry.

 

[DuncanWatson]

Around here it would be above average. Mine's pretty average a 51 miles round trip if I make zero deviations (like stopping at the grocery store). Three of my sixteen co-workers commute 90 miles one-way. Five are 35 to 50 miles. The rest, including me, are 25 or less one-way.

51 isn't 75. 75 is 150% of 51, that is a huge difference. Additionally, just because a car doesn't work for DFW exurbs and PHX exurbs doesn't mean a 150 mile leaf isn't a game changer. Exurbs dwellers have specifically chosen a long commute for a big house. It hurts their quality of life in numerous ways, one of them is that they are very car dependent. When you start digging into various cities and looking for commutes to the core of greater than 50 miles you find that even exurbs are not that far away. DFW for instance has a ratio of 10-1 urban to exurban denizens. Phoenix has a 12-1 ratio. The study I was looking at (here) classified a lot of suburbs as urban but for our purposes that is what we are talking about. 91% of DFW denizens would find the 150 mile Leaf perfectly fine, even more in PHX.

Your uneasiness about average driving is overly colored by your personal lens of experience. Most people just don't live that far away. My last four residences were 12 miles, 3 miles, 1 mile and 10 miles from my job. If I go back farther than 20 years it still stays under 20 miles until I get to my Long Island to NYC commute and that was by train (40miles). Just because extremes exist doesn't mean that the extremes are the majority or even common.

 

[jerry33]

51 isn't 75. 75 is 150% of 51, that is a huge difference. Additionally, just because a car doesn't work for DFW exurbs and PHX exurbs doesn't mean a 150 mile leaf isn't a game changer. Exurbs dwellers have specifically chosen a long commute for a big house. It hurts their quality of life in numerous ways, one of them is that they are very car dependent. When you start digging into various cities and looking for commutes to the core of greater than 50 miles you find that even exurbs are not that far away. DFW for instance has a ratio of 10-1 urban to exurban denizens. Phoenix has a 12-1 ratio. The study I was looking at (here) classified a lot of suburbs as urban but for our purposes that is what we are talking about. 91% of DFW denizens would find the 150 mile Leaf perfectly fine, even more in PHX.

If it did a real 150 miles, not 150 marketing miles. 150 marketing miles means an EPA of 100 or 110. You don't want to run from 100% to zero, so that's 70-80 real miles without battery stress.

I don't call going through areas where there is 100% urban build up exurban. That seems like a copout to me.

 

[Al Sherman]

Bingo. I suspect that those averages that get quoted also include people who only drive their car on the weekend and commute to work by train. If you drive 200 miles on the weekend your daily average is less than 30 miles a day over the week, but that average has nothing to do with the range you require.

This is pretty much me. My daily "commute" to the first tee is 8 miles one way. No problem for the Leaf. I almost bought one. Every once in a while I need to drive to Indy, or Cincy. Round trip including running around town and taking weather, and real world mileage into account would be too much for the 150 mile Leaf to handle without charging.

To sell an EV to the masses the range has to be higher, and the price has to be lower. There's a sweet spot. That's what we're discussing. I just don't think it's 150 miles. It works great until you want to go somewhere for the day, AND come home. The beauty of the MS' range is you can do almost anything except a road trip and just plug the car in when you get home. I don't ever have to tell friends when we are going to dinner in Cincinnati: "let's take your ICE, my EV might not make it back in these weather conditions."

 

[dsm363]

300-400 miles of real range in most non-extreme weather is my guess for mass market acceptance given a lower priced car of course

 

[cwerdna]

If it did a real 150 miles, not 150 marketing miles. 150 marketing miles means an EPA of 100 or 110. You don't want to run from 100% to zero, so that's 70-80 real miles without battery stress.

I haven't had a chance to read most of this thread, but I received the survey and it mentioned 150 miles of EPA range.

It's good that they were explicit this time because Nissan kept using the "100 mile" range line about the Leaf early on and numerous dealers, auto show reps and even a European exec have mentioned the inflated 100 mile figure or an even higher one, 200 km (=124 miles).

They survey had a bunch of issues that were confusing/ambiguous which I and others pointed out. My post on this was at My Nissan Leaf Forum View topic - New Nissan LEAF Survey.

The confusing questions were along the lines of "how many miles of range do you expect to gain at ______?" where _____ could be places like restaurants, parks, shopping malls, etc. But, it didn't let us specify what type of charging was there L2 or CHAdeMO, nor did it tell us. So, I just had to assume L2 for most of their questions.

 

[ElSupreme]

I think that if they offered a 150 mile range car, they would sell a lot at first, and then as people get used to EVs, people will adopt lower range models more.

100 miles is enough for just about everyone almost all the time, an extra 25 miles covers a lot of extenuating circumstances, 25 more is mostly going to serve to shut people up about range anxiety. 150 is still not enough for serious inter-city driving, but it would be popular.

I think 100 'real world miles' is very close to the sweet spot (about 2 hours in the car in a day). So I think a 2X LEAF with 150 EPA miles would be really close to that sweet spot.

Depends on what part of the country. Here is Phx, it is not uncommon to have 50 - 70 mile commutes just for work. (Mine is 60). Then tack on evening errands, dinner, etc, and you are already at 100 miles.

There are obviously outliers here. I commute just over 60 miles (round trip) every day. I don't live in the exurbs but commute to the exact opposite side of Atlanta every day. Or I commute to my office which is in the exurbs of Atlanta (that trip is only ~50 miles round trip, as I live on that side of town). Add in about 3-5 miles for lunch, and possible side trips on the way home I am looking at 60-70 miles (about 30 of which are at interstate speed 70+). Which means that a LEAF won't quite cut it without charging at work (and I work on a client's site, so I can't quite 'ask' for a charge spot). But a LEAF 2X would be perfect. Plus I could go out to dinner ~10-20 miles and still have a little reserve. While still getting all my charging in over night when power is cheap.

But yes large urban environments will always stretch 'range' issues. And people living in the exurbs, neighboring town, will as well. But for most people it works fine.

- - - Updated - - -

Another thing to consider. I have my Model S (I ain't trading it for a LEAF 2X) so my families other/second car can just be a commuter car. The Model S does all the combined driving, it does the distance driving. All the LEAF 2X has to do is get to work and back, maybe make it to lunch, and a errand on the way home. Which even 100 EPA range could do for 95%+ commuters.

That is assuming they have a family car that can do more than that. And for people who commute less than 50 miles round trip 150 EPA range gives them a car that can do 'combined' duty at the end of the day.

 

[AWDtsla]

You're all dreaming if you think doubling the capacity of the battery will get you 150 miles. Physics doesn't work like that.

 

[davewill]

You're all dreaming if you think doubling the capacity of the battery will get you 150 miles. Physics doesn't work like that.

Why would doubling the battery capacity NOT garner 150 miles of range on a car that already gets 84? I agree you won't double the range, but double 84 is 168 miles, not 150. Besides, Nissan was the one that posited the 150 mile range number, and would only offer this if they could reduce the space/weight requirements of their cells. They aren't going to just double the physical size of the battery in a LEAF, it wouldn't fit.

 

[NickInLab]

You're all dreaming if you think doubling the capacity of the battery will get you 150 miles. Physics doesn't work like that.

Doubling the battery capacity only raises the curb weight by only about 20%: (3300+660)/(3300) = 1.2. That's less than four FAA-sized adults. In a pure hill climb or on a race track, sure, you'll only get about 66% (2/1.2=1.66) more range instead of 100%. But you'll get within 1% of 2x range for flat freeway driving (where rolling resistance is negligible and air resistance dominates), and the extra weight probably results in much less than 10% penalty for city driving (where half of your energy goes to acceleration and have of that can be recovered with regen). In short, most drivers are probably going to see close enough to 2x range that it doesn't matter.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Doubling the battery capacity only raises the curb weight by only about 20%: (3300+660)/(3300) = 1.2. That's less than four FAA-sized adults. In a pure hill climb or on a race track, sure, you'll only get about 66% (2/1.2=1.66) more range instead of 100%. But you'll get within 1% of 2x range for flat freeway driving (where rolling resistance is negligible and air resistance dominates), and the extra weight probably results in much less than 10% penalty for city driving (where half of your energy goes to acceleration and have of that can be recovered with regen). In short, most drivers are probably going to see close enough to 2x range that it doesn't matter.

Not to mention that the battery's average discharge C rate will be lower, especially in cold temperatures.

 

[roblab]

I just don't understand the double standard here. Gas car drivers feel that a 10-15 gas tank is essential on a car that gets 20 mpg, or 200 -300 miles of range. No gas car driver is willing to give up mileage, *even though* they have fast recharge of only 5 minutes. They have done the commute, they have 30 miles used, they DO NOT stop to recharge the tank, simply because they don't need to.

But start talking BEVs, then it's all about, "you only need" 30 miles here, 30 miles there. "I drive 12 miles to work. I don't need 150 miles range". What makes the difference? It's not about what you can afford. It's about what every car has: range. Why are people arguing about Nissan offering more range? Are they afraid they won't be able to afford an EV?

People afford what they want. They don't need the F250 quad cab 400 hp 4wd. They WANT it. People don't need 300 miles of range. But they will still pay for it if given the choice. Just like they are willing to pay for wine with their meal (or just simply eat out 2 meals a day for convenience), have the big TV in the living room, several computing devices, the $350 cable and satellite fees (times 12 months).

I may be wrong, but it seems to me that most of those opting for the 60 kWh battery had not driven electric before. They were calculating that they only "need" 100 miles, and if it were needed, there is always supercharging. Others who had put up with marginal range DO NOT want that irritation, and gladly pay for more.

Let's use the same standard. If you want lousy range, buy a gas car, rip out the tank, put in a 5 gallon substitute, and refuel every 100 miles, and tell me you did it because you don't "need" all that extra range.

 

[EVNow]

What makes the difference?

You can refuel at home.

I expect 30 to 40% will still lease the 80 mile Leaf for $5k less.

 

[Skotty]

Add liquid cooling and same here. I bought the Volt because there really wasn't another solution, not because I was in love with the extended range approach.

+1. Hey adrewket, we are on the same boat! *wave*

 

[772]

We own a Leaf and, for our use, 150 mile range isn't really any different from the 80 mile range when we can charge at home. And where we live, there isn't a DC fast charging network for the Leaf, either, so we wouldn't be taking it on road trips. Even 150 miles is too small for that. Maybe if we had CHAdeMO around here, but that's still not convenient for a ~500-600 mile trip. Give me ~250-300 mile range and then I will pay a premium.