-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Nissan Leaf
- Thread starter efusco
- Start date
Really? I think it sounded like a normal person being told that the range was 100 miles and being surprised that it failed after 82. I think that we have to be careful of the hyperbole; it's going to get us in the end.
We have to say 100 ideal miles; 75 on the highway.
This is going to be my late New Years resolution because I'm as guilty as anyone else. It's going to be tough as well as you and I know that we'd have made it in the Leaf, we would not have been blasting along in the outside lane on the highway and would have nursed it the last few miles.
That's why I'm driving a Tesla. When I first heard that it could do over 200 miles, I immediately realized it was a fully practical car. I can drive it all over town and not even worry about the charge level. 100 miles means you'll be having range anxiety on a daily basis.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Depends. My 50 mile max range conversion never gives me range anxiety, but I know what I'm doing and it meets my needs.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
Yeah that was pretty much a hatchet job from an uneducated individual. If she had simply not tried to keep up with traffic at 65mph she probably would have made it. However, Nissan does need to do a better job of range estimation, including hitting the reduced power turtle mode sooner which would preserve the battery and give more warning that you need to find power or pull over. Also add a real SOC gauge, not that this driver would have known what to do about it. The reality is that people respond to numbers with more zeros, if you are selling a "100 mile" range EV it better be at least a 120 mile range EV in most conditions because they'll expect to get than 100 miles no matter what. Under promise and over deliver always works better.
"The Roadster in Standard mode, on the highway, in around freezing temperatures is a 100 mile range car."
Give us a little more info, please. Speed on the highway? I drive every day in whatever weather,
including well below freezing, on a road where I'm going 55 to 70 for 80% of the trip, and I would
normally expect to get 160 miles easily.
Give us a little more info, please. Speed on the highway? I drive every day in whatever weather,
including well below freezing, on a road where I'm going 55 to 70 for 80% of the trip, and I would
normally expect to get 160 miles easily.
strider
Active Member
But the drivers have to engage their brain a little bit. No ICE car gets its EPA mileage when used in the real world so why would an EV? It's like taking an ICE car's EPA mileage, multiplying it by the capacity of the fuel tank, and then complaining when it ran out of fuel before doing that number of miles.
When I talk about my Roadster I'm am careful to tell people that it has an "EPA range of 240 miles but real-world range is just under 200." If they look concerned I point out the above fact that ICE cars don't get their EPA mileage either.
When I talk about my Roadster I'm am careful to tell people that it has an "EPA range of 240 miles but real-world range is just under 200." If they look concerned I point out the above fact that ICE cars don't get their EPA mileage either.
benji4
Roadster 2.5 #0476
The Roadster is the only EV right now on the road that gives you a choice --- have all the fun you want when you don't have more than 150 miles to drive, but get 240 or more when you need it. And you CAN get ideal range or better with the Roadster. All you have to do is keep energy use down to < 250 Wh/mi, and you should be able to do it. The LEAF gives you neither fun nor range unfortunately... I guess she should have got a Roadster instead of a LEAF! So was her commentary accurate? Maybe not too far off. Did she choose the right car? No.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
She was definitely trying to create a sensational story - with all the warning Leaf gives she still decided to keep going and stop in the middle of the road instead of pulling over, even though it could have led to an accident and hurt people.
BTW, it will be interesting to compare roadster and ESFlow in the fun department when it comes out.
It would be pretty amazing if electric cars brought the parties together. Somehow I doubt that will happen.
The hint of generalization in his comment makes me cringe a little. Hinting that everyone benefiting from our purchase of overseas oil is a terrorist is just beyond the pale.
The hint of generalization in his comment makes me cringe a little. Hinting that everyone benefiting from our purchase of overseas oil is a terrorist is just beyond the pale.
Last edited:
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
It's a good point to make with certain audiences who respond to that type of thing, he knows his constituency. It also points out the fact that our dependence on oil and our involvement in the Middle East has certainly fueled the culture of terrorism.
Arnold Panz
Model Sig 304, VIN 542
It's a really helpful point for EVs with a particular crowd -- those who don't believe in global warming/climate change. In order for EVs to get favorable treatment in the US Congress, there needs to be another justification besides the environment, because almost all Republicans, and some Democrats, either deny that global warming is a problem, and/or don't have any interest in protecting the environment. However, our oil addiction/consumption helps fund some of the worst dictatorships in the world, and we've been essentially funding both sides of the Iraq war from the get go. This is an undeniable fact, and the sooner EV proponents use that as the justification for more favorable laws to help promote the growth of EVs, the more effective their lobbying efforts will be.
Jaff
Active Member
Not to split hairs Arnold, but I think you should qualify the Global Warming tag...many believe that Global Warming is a fact, but that is due to natural causes (not man-made).
I do agree though with your conclusion about the U.S. Congess needing additional justification though as Global Warming will not currently push the EV / Oil subsidy issue / et al to where it needs to be (discussed today, not put off the table or on the back burner...)
Sorry for the off topic comment.
I do agree though with your conclusion about the U.S. Congess needing additional justification though as Global Warming will not currently push the EV / Oil subsidy issue / et al to where it needs to be (discussed today, not put off the table or on the back burner...)
Sorry for the off topic comment.
Snowy day Nissan LEAF test drive
@Dpeilow: As requested:
I test drove a LEAF a week ago. For context it snowed that day in the Edinburgh area (unusual for the time of year) and hovered plus/minus one degree C around freezing. It was actually snowing for about half the test drive and there was plenty of slushy snow on the ground.
The test drive was unaccompanied, lasting from about 8:30 am until 11:00 am. I was given special dispensation for a long test drive as I already drive an EV. The car was supposedly fully charged on pick up and it showed 73 miles of estimated range. As others have noted there is no proper state of charge meter so who knows (see later). I would say that the "fuel gauge" seemed to show all segments full. A bit of fiddling found the screen where you can real-time monitor kW draw for driving, AC and other.
A note on AC. I had to use it quite a lot to stay warm (though the car was warm when I got in, possibly due to having been in the dealership's service bay charging overnight, rather than any technical wizardy - the dealers are still learning) and to keep the screen clear. Usage was similar to the Roadster i.e. 1.5 to 3kW.
I was alone to start and drove downhill from the dealership (Alex F. Noble Nissan) via the A720 (dual carriageway city bypass) in free flowing fast traffic (60 ish) in Eco mode. This is a steep downhill where if I balance the Roadster's accelerator at zero kW it glides well, gaining a little speed. I found that I could balance the LEAF at zero kW as well, however to my surprise it didn't glide well, slowing reasonably fast. My expectation was that better aerodynamics would favour the LEAF substantially. Possibly I was misreading the gauges: I had the main gauge at zero which I assumed was traction power only, however the AC and accessories combined would have been 2-3 kW at that point. So if the main gauge is actually traction + AC + accessories it would mean I was doing 2-3 kW of regen braking. Also wet/snowy roads would add some drag. I hope to be able to re-test at some point on a good day.
Off the A720 onto local roads to home the car was a very reasonable substitute for my "other car", a Toyota Prius. In Eco mode it feels quite "wallowy" - like you are pushing against mush to accelerate. But it does keep both acceleration rates and speeds down. In normal mode acceleration is peppy - better than the Prius (but obviously not a contender versus a Roadster). I would be very happy to drive with this level of "go" on a daily basis.
Getting home I quickly picked up my son and dropped him a couple miles to a morning activity at school then back home to pick up my wife. [Aside: This drive is one that we do up to four times a day - it annoys me when I have to do it in the Prius (when I need 3 or 4 seats) because I know that the engine doesn't make it out of the cold start zone and so mpg and emissions are bad. I am much happier when I only need one seat and can take the Tesla - EVs are made for this - no penalty for short trips as there is with ICEs (whether hybrid or not). So I was hoping the LEAF might become a Prius substitute.]
We then drove into the centre of Edinburgh on a mix of 70, 50, 40 and 30 mph speed limit roads through traffic of moderate density. Speeds were never above and often well below speed limits. The car was easy to handle, and took a number of steep grades fluidly.
Crossing Edinburgh we then headed out to Sighthill, up through Wester Hailes and climbed through Colinton back up to the A720 bypass which we rejoined at Dreghorn. At this point we were at our highest elevation, from which a couple of miles of mostly downhill motorway speed driving took us back to the Straiton junction where we turned off and back towards the dealership.
My wife didn't fancy a half hour of EV chat with the dealer so I dropped her off at IKEA. The car park there was very snowy, and in remoter parts pretty much free of cars, so I took the opportunity to see how the LEAF would handle on slushy snow. The results were pretty good - better certainly than a Prius, with minimal wheel slippage under moderate acceleration. Benefits of EVs having such direct drivetrains when traction control is needed.
Before I mention the negative, let me say that LEAF drives like a pleasant EV. There was nothing really dramatic about the test drive - the car managed well in city centre stop-go and on the highway; steering is very light in that Japanese car way, but precise and controlled; acceleration was pleasing; the car remained well controlled on snow.
Back at the dealership I noted the mileage covered and the estimated miles remaining. The results truly disappointed me:
33.7 miles driven
20 estimated miles remaining
4 bars (of 12) on the state of charge "fuel gauge"
[Notes and Analysis - please feel free to skip:
1. Not knowing how the range estimate is made, the 20 estimated miles remaining may all relate to my driving, or may have an element of the driver before; it may include my elevation climb from the school at sea-level to the dealership at around 150 meters; it may reflect a fall from the peak above Colinton at 160.
2. 4 bars remaining could mean anything! Assuming they are linear in state of charge (I don't know that - they could indicate pack voltage rather than kWh for all I know) then 4 bars could mean anything from just below 5 bars (41% SOC, 10 kWh) to just over 3 bars (25% SOC, 6 kWh). This is amazingly imprecise when you compare it to "Ideal Miles" in the Tesla which are out of ~240, and I fret if I feel they are off by 1 or 2 - i.e. My expectation is that SOC will be reported with a granularity of around 1% or better.
3. Of the 4 remaining bars, two are coloured red - naturally, I would be reluctant to use them. I think many others will feel the same, compounded by the lack of certainty what two bars means!
4. Analysing the numbers on face value, we dropped 53 miles of estimated range to drive 33.7 miiles. Extrapolating that, assuming 4 bars remaining means we really were 2/3 through the battery, we could have driven 50 miles total (with 16 miles remaining, not 20). Worse case, if 4 bars means just about to be 3 bars, total range would be just 45 miles, with just 11 left at that point. Best case (we just dropped 5 to 4 bars) it's 58 miles total, of which 24 remaining. This variance is well beyond tolerable if the driver has somewhere to go that is tight on range and needs to estimate whether they can get there.
5. We apparently dropped 2/3 of 24 kWh = 16 kWh to drive 33.7 miles so must have averaged 475 Wh/mile. (I couldn't understand the LEAF screens well enough, nor did the bar graphs seem precise enough, to corroborate this: one screen seemed to suggest the average usage was 125 Wh/mile which is nonsensical against the mileage and battery SOC meter reports.)
If 4 bars means nearly 5, that's 7/12 of 24 kWh = 14 kWh for 33.7 miles = 415 Wh/mile. Now that is by no means impossible - I have seen the Roadster do that kind of performance on cold days when AC had to be on to keep the screen clear.]
Could the dealer make this make sense? He was to be honest quite worried. I know he had been expecting far more range - when I came in he was excited that the EU had updated the LEAF's range officially to 109 miles. I had already cautioned him that this was on a very optimistic drive cycle (NEDC) and that the EPA result of 73 miles was likely more realistic. However and even so both he and I were blown away by how bad the range apparently was from the test drive.
He did offer that perhaps some range impact may have flowed from the following:
- Apparently there is an 80% charge mode on the LEAF like Standard on the Tesla. He didn't know if this was used by default
- Someone did a short drive in the car the night before - had it been charged after?
- Were there really 12 bars when we started? (I am confident that it did say 73 miles estimated)
I would add:
- It was cold and they charged the car in their service bay - did the pack as a result not fully charge?
- The cabin was warm when I got in - was a large fraction of the first bar already spent?
Adding all these factors:
80% charge mode
59% - the drop from just over 11 to just under 5 bars
20kWh - estimate of unknown actual cold capacity in the battery
= 9.44 kWh to go 33.7 miles
= 280 Wh/mile
All plausible. And fundamentally irrelevant. If the driver can't easily know the actual state of charge and Wh/mile they can't estimate range. The car's computer doesn't and can't do it better than the driver as it's not privy to where the driver is going to take it next. Nissan needs to wake up and smell the coffee on this one: accurate numerical values for SOC and Wh/mile are required not optional.
Equally Nissan needs to do a MUCH better job educating it's dealers. Jim at Alex F. Noble is highly motivated, but Nissan has not informed him enough. He can't answer these questions.
I suggested that he use the LEAF as his daily driver for a while to learn what the realistic range is and what affects it. I also said that before I could make a final decision we'd need to have the car for a day to do a full day of normal driving (my wife was very clear - we were well short of what she might need to do in a day). This was when the bombshell dropped:
"Sorry, there is no time for that. Its 12 March. You need to confirm your order by 15 March or the price of £23,995 that you thought you locked in just 13 days ago is going to rise by £2,000."
As I had put in a deposit on Jim's advice just before 1 March to try to hold an option against the announced price rise this was most unwelcome. Also note that the 12th March was the first day that this dealership could offer test drives. For the 15th to be the deadline was thus outrageous. My conclusion is that Nissan has so much demand or so little capacity that they really don't care if they piss off quite a large group of potential customers. They really want the extra £2,000.
To be fair both Jim and David Noble (who owns the dealership) were unhappy that Nissan had forced this price rise and timing. "A bad way to launch a product, with a price rise" was said.
Also it was put to me that locking an order ASAP was necessary to avoid lead times stretching beyond Q3 2011. I pointed out that with the Japan earthquake there were no guarantees that lead times would not be massively more stretched than that.
Anyway given that the UK LEAF is already over priced versus the US one; the £2,000 rise widens that gap; and the poor range and/or information in my test drive, I decided to pass. I think the narrowing gap between delivery time expectations for LEAF and Model S also played a part, as did my certainty that Model S will deliver decent range (at least 100 in real use) and really good driver feedback.
Jim did put in one more phone call to me on the 14th to reassure me that in subsequent test drives consumption had been lower. I believe him. But I also know what happened to me on my snowy test drive. I think it's blown the LEAF as an option for me.
@Dpeilow: As requested:
I test drove a LEAF a week ago. For context it snowed that day in the Edinburgh area (unusual for the time of year) and hovered plus/minus one degree C around freezing. It was actually snowing for about half the test drive and there was plenty of slushy snow on the ground.
The test drive was unaccompanied, lasting from about 8:30 am until 11:00 am. I was given special dispensation for a long test drive as I already drive an EV. The car was supposedly fully charged on pick up and it showed 73 miles of estimated range. As others have noted there is no proper state of charge meter so who knows (see later). I would say that the "fuel gauge" seemed to show all segments full. A bit of fiddling found the screen where you can real-time monitor kW draw for driving, AC and other.
A note on AC. I had to use it quite a lot to stay warm (though the car was warm when I got in, possibly due to having been in the dealership's service bay charging overnight, rather than any technical wizardy - the dealers are still learning) and to keep the screen clear. Usage was similar to the Roadster i.e. 1.5 to 3kW.
I was alone to start and drove downhill from the dealership (Alex F. Noble Nissan) via the A720 (dual carriageway city bypass) in free flowing fast traffic (60 ish) in Eco mode. This is a steep downhill where if I balance the Roadster's accelerator at zero kW it glides well, gaining a little speed. I found that I could balance the LEAF at zero kW as well, however to my surprise it didn't glide well, slowing reasonably fast. My expectation was that better aerodynamics would favour the LEAF substantially. Possibly I was misreading the gauges: I had the main gauge at zero which I assumed was traction power only, however the AC and accessories combined would have been 2-3 kW at that point. So if the main gauge is actually traction + AC + accessories it would mean I was doing 2-3 kW of regen braking. Also wet/snowy roads would add some drag. I hope to be able to re-test at some point on a good day.
Off the A720 onto local roads to home the car was a very reasonable substitute for my "other car", a Toyota Prius. In Eco mode it feels quite "wallowy" - like you are pushing against mush to accelerate. But it does keep both acceleration rates and speeds down. In normal mode acceleration is peppy - better than the Prius (but obviously not a contender versus a Roadster). I would be very happy to drive with this level of "go" on a daily basis.
Getting home I quickly picked up my son and dropped him a couple miles to a morning activity at school then back home to pick up my wife. [Aside: This drive is one that we do up to four times a day - it annoys me when I have to do it in the Prius (when I need 3 or 4 seats) because I know that the engine doesn't make it out of the cold start zone and so mpg and emissions are bad. I am much happier when I only need one seat and can take the Tesla - EVs are made for this - no penalty for short trips as there is with ICEs (whether hybrid or not). So I was hoping the LEAF might become a Prius substitute.]
We then drove into the centre of Edinburgh on a mix of 70, 50, 40 and 30 mph speed limit roads through traffic of moderate density. Speeds were never above and often well below speed limits. The car was easy to handle, and took a number of steep grades fluidly.
Crossing Edinburgh we then headed out to Sighthill, up through Wester Hailes and climbed through Colinton back up to the A720 bypass which we rejoined at Dreghorn. At this point we were at our highest elevation, from which a couple of miles of mostly downhill motorway speed driving took us back to the Straiton junction where we turned off and back towards the dealership.
My wife didn't fancy a half hour of EV chat with the dealer so I dropped her off at IKEA. The car park there was very snowy, and in remoter parts pretty much free of cars, so I took the opportunity to see how the LEAF would handle on slushy snow. The results were pretty good - better certainly than a Prius, with minimal wheel slippage under moderate acceleration. Benefits of EVs having such direct drivetrains when traction control is needed.
Before I mention the negative, let me say that LEAF drives like a pleasant EV. There was nothing really dramatic about the test drive - the car managed well in city centre stop-go and on the highway; steering is very light in that Japanese car way, but precise and controlled; acceleration was pleasing; the car remained well controlled on snow.
Back at the dealership I noted the mileage covered and the estimated miles remaining. The results truly disappointed me:
33.7 miles driven
20 estimated miles remaining
4 bars (of 12) on the state of charge "fuel gauge"
[Notes and Analysis - please feel free to skip:
1. Not knowing how the range estimate is made, the 20 estimated miles remaining may all relate to my driving, or may have an element of the driver before; it may include my elevation climb from the school at sea-level to the dealership at around 150 meters; it may reflect a fall from the peak above Colinton at 160.
2. 4 bars remaining could mean anything! Assuming they are linear in state of charge (I don't know that - they could indicate pack voltage rather than kWh for all I know) then 4 bars could mean anything from just below 5 bars (41% SOC, 10 kWh) to just over 3 bars (25% SOC, 6 kWh). This is amazingly imprecise when you compare it to "Ideal Miles" in the Tesla which are out of ~240, and I fret if I feel they are off by 1 or 2 - i.e. My expectation is that SOC will be reported with a granularity of around 1% or better.
3. Of the 4 remaining bars, two are coloured red - naturally, I would be reluctant to use them. I think many others will feel the same, compounded by the lack of certainty what two bars means!
4. Analysing the numbers on face value, we dropped 53 miles of estimated range to drive 33.7 miiles. Extrapolating that, assuming 4 bars remaining means we really were 2/3 through the battery, we could have driven 50 miles total (with 16 miles remaining, not 20). Worse case, if 4 bars means just about to be 3 bars, total range would be just 45 miles, with just 11 left at that point. Best case (we just dropped 5 to 4 bars) it's 58 miles total, of which 24 remaining. This variance is well beyond tolerable if the driver has somewhere to go that is tight on range and needs to estimate whether they can get there.
5. We apparently dropped 2/3 of 24 kWh = 16 kWh to drive 33.7 miles so must have averaged 475 Wh/mile. (I couldn't understand the LEAF screens well enough, nor did the bar graphs seem precise enough, to corroborate this: one screen seemed to suggest the average usage was 125 Wh/mile which is nonsensical against the mileage and battery SOC meter reports.)
If 4 bars means nearly 5, that's 7/12 of 24 kWh = 14 kWh for 33.7 miles = 415 Wh/mile. Now that is by no means impossible - I have seen the Roadster do that kind of performance on cold days when AC had to be on to keep the screen clear.]
Could the dealer make this make sense? He was to be honest quite worried. I know he had been expecting far more range - when I came in he was excited that the EU had updated the LEAF's range officially to 109 miles. I had already cautioned him that this was on a very optimistic drive cycle (NEDC) and that the EPA result of 73 miles was likely more realistic. However and even so both he and I were blown away by how bad the range apparently was from the test drive.
He did offer that perhaps some range impact may have flowed from the following:
- Apparently there is an 80% charge mode on the LEAF like Standard on the Tesla. He didn't know if this was used by default
- Someone did a short drive in the car the night before - had it been charged after?
- Were there really 12 bars when we started? (I am confident that it did say 73 miles estimated)
I would add:
- It was cold and they charged the car in their service bay - did the pack as a result not fully charge?
- The cabin was warm when I got in - was a large fraction of the first bar already spent?
Adding all these factors:
80% charge mode
59% - the drop from just over 11 to just under 5 bars
20kWh - estimate of unknown actual cold capacity in the battery
= 9.44 kWh to go 33.7 miles
= 280 Wh/mile
All plausible. And fundamentally irrelevant. If the driver can't easily know the actual state of charge and Wh/mile they can't estimate range. The car's computer doesn't and can't do it better than the driver as it's not privy to where the driver is going to take it next. Nissan needs to wake up and smell the coffee on this one: accurate numerical values for SOC and Wh/mile are required not optional.
Equally Nissan needs to do a MUCH better job educating it's dealers. Jim at Alex F. Noble is highly motivated, but Nissan has not informed him enough. He can't answer these questions.
I suggested that he use the LEAF as his daily driver for a while to learn what the realistic range is and what affects it. I also said that before I could make a final decision we'd need to have the car for a day to do a full day of normal driving (my wife was very clear - we were well short of what she might need to do in a day). This was when the bombshell dropped:
"Sorry, there is no time for that. Its 12 March. You need to confirm your order by 15 March or the price of £23,995 that you thought you locked in just 13 days ago is going to rise by £2,000."
As I had put in a deposit on Jim's advice just before 1 March to try to hold an option against the announced price rise this was most unwelcome. Also note that the 12th March was the first day that this dealership could offer test drives. For the 15th to be the deadline was thus outrageous. My conclusion is that Nissan has so much demand or so little capacity that they really don't care if they piss off quite a large group of potential customers. They really want the extra £2,000.
To be fair both Jim and David Noble (who owns the dealership) were unhappy that Nissan had forced this price rise and timing. "A bad way to launch a product, with a price rise" was said.
Also it was put to me that locking an order ASAP was necessary to avoid lead times stretching beyond Q3 2011. I pointed out that with the Japan earthquake there were no guarantees that lead times would not be massively more stretched than that.
Anyway given that the UK LEAF is already over priced versus the US one; the £2,000 rise widens that gap; and the poor range and/or information in my test drive, I decided to pass. I think the narrowing gap between delivery time expectations for LEAF and Model S also played a part, as did my certainty that Model S will deliver decent range (at least 100 in real use) and really good driver feedback.
Jim did put in one more phone call to me on the 14th to reassure me that in subsequent test drives consumption had been lower. I believe him. But I also know what happened to me on my snowy test drive. I think it's blown the LEAF as an option for me.
Last edited:
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
While reading I suspected an 80% charge. You're 100% correct on the need for a digital SOC readout of actual pack capacity. They dumbed it down too much with the 12 bars. Would have been good if you had turned off AC and accessories on the downhill to see if you were really coasting or on regen. The price increase this soon seems like a terrible return on investment for Nissan, the few dollars they bring in may not counter the bad press. Of course with all that's going on in Japan it may largely go unnoticed in the grand scheme of things.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
Andrew, the easiest way to figure out efficiency is to reset Leaf efficiency meter before the trip & look at it at the end. Both heating & elevation are efficiency killers, as you would know.
Similar threads
- Article
