Nissan Dealer Leaks Info On 2016 LEAF – Two Battery Sizes To Be Offered

AUG 17 2015 BY ERIC LOVEDAY 206

Andy Mohr Avon Nissan has updated its dealership’s LEAF page with the following information:

“While there look to be great things ahead for the next-generation Leaf, the 2016 Nissan Leaf changes should impress Indianapolis and Greenwood drivers. Despite being the end of the first-gen Leaf, the new model will have significant updates from the 2015 Leaf. The 2016 Nissan Leaf release date and pricing are still tentative, but we do know a bit about what you can expect from the new model as well as features we think will carry over when it debuts.”

In regards to the 2016 LEAF, the dealership states (here) the following:

2016 Nissan LEAF Changes

“While there are many features that make the Leaf a popular vehicle, there is one thing it’s known for above all else: its battery. The 2016 Nissan Leaf redesign will bring a first to the electric car: your choice of two different batteries.

The standard Leaf will come with the same battery as the 2015 model, featuring an EPA-estimated driving range of 84 miles.
Drivers of higher trim levels will enjoy a battery with as much as 25% increased capacity, delivering a driving range of as much as 110 miles.

The majority of electric cars only feature one battery option, and by providing drivers with their choice of a lower capacity battery if they don’t intend to drive long distances, the new Leaf can find a home in even more garages.”

2015 Nissan LEAF

2015 Nissan LEAF

And here’s additional confirmation of the two battery sizes to be offered in the 2016 LEAF:

2016 LEAF Ordering Form

2016 LEAF Ordering Form

InsideEVs exclusively reported on these expected changes earlier this Summer. In that report, we stated:

“With the market demanding a longer range LEAF to better compete against the likes of the next generation of Chevrolet Volt and other new EV offerings, the current generation of Nissan LEAF will be getting a larger 30 kWh battery for the higher trim levels of the car this Fall.

As for the new battery sizing’s effect on range, we feel the 2016 LEAF (SV/SL) could have an EPA rated range of about 105 to 110 miles. (170 to 180 km of real world driving).”

Please do check out our previous articles on the topic of the longer range 2016 LEAF.  They provide additional background and insight into what to expect when the 2016 LEAF launches this Fall:

Report: 2016 Nissan LEAF To Get 25% Larger Battery/More Range, New Colors

Longer Range 2016 Nissan LEAF Coming This Fall? We Think So, Here Is Why

Hat tip to Ricardo Borba & David Laur!

Source: Avon Nissan

Categories: Nissan

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

206 Comments on "Nissan Dealer Leaks Info On 2016 LEAF – Two Battery Sizes To Be Offered"

newest oldest most voted

Next question, what will the price be to upgrade an earlier model to the 30KWHR?

Exactly! But if Nissan can offer the upgraded battery for the same cost as a current SV/SL that would be a pretty huge step.

I’ve had a Leaf for 3 years (Now an i3) and never need more than the 80 mile range. However I understand range anxiety for those not use to managing charging. 110 miles will be enough to put that to rest for many people.

If the price is appealing, I’d be interested in upgrading our 2013 Leaf battery, with 92% capacity, 30k miles, to the 30KW version. It’d be great to see a prorated trade-in option, based on your existing battery’s health.

I’m with you. I have a 2015 and can make it to Baltimore (68 miles) on an 80% charge at highway speeds, but would love the extra range when I can only make a brief stop to charge before returning home.

Oh, stop it with the condescending “for those not use [sic] to managing charging” crap. Pretending like nobody needs to drive more than 80 miles (really 70 miles with buffer, or 40 miles with buffer in the winter) just hurts the adoption of EVs. Be realistic about what this is, which is a slight improvement to the single biggest limitation of EVs and hurdle to adoption.

While you are correct John the truth is the limitation is mostly psychological, in the real world there are millions of cars that are almost never driven very far in a day. People just “what if” it to death…

I manage to roll into the driveway after having driven 95+ miles at least once a month – and a good number of those occur after I’ve stopped somewhere along the way and charged up some. It’s not just the case where I am afraid of driving close to the limit. I push those limits HARD sometimes.

Just two days ago, I drove to a hospital 47 miles away, partly on the Interstate at speeds that are known to sap my battery faster than my normal rate. I then drove from there to a church 25 miles north of my home (the opposite direction as the hospital) and left the church with 23 miles showing on the guess-o-meter.

I go 90 miles RT every other week to an University. Fortunately, it has 240V chargers and not many EVs yet. And then, on average every 2 months, a round trip to the airport which is 43 miles away. I manage with the Spark EV by driving slow. An EPA rated 100 to 120 miles will certainly be good, if can be done at same price.

Dave, sorry, but you’re wrong. You want to believe that it’s psychological, because then the problem is a “lack of education”. In other words, anybody who doesn’t like EVs must be too stupid, and they just need to be educated.

Needing to drive somewhere that is 40+ miles away, and then needing to drive back, isn’t a psychological problem. I’d wager that if you don’t occasionally need to drive 40+ miles away, then you might not have friends or family, which is an actual psychological problem.

For commuting, an 80 mile range is great, but people take other trips too and it’s a very rational decision to purchase a car that fills the most roles possible. Heck, you usually commute alone, so shouldn’t everyone just buy a motorcycle? You don’t really NEED those extra three or four seats if you only use them on 10% of your trips, do you?

So back to the original point, 110 miles is a very nice improvement, but it is not a “psychological problem” to want more than 80 miles of range for your car.

I don’t commute anywhere, but I drive a lot. Therefore, I do not want another 80 mile range car unless it was a third or fourth car to be used maybe for kids to drive to school.

I also don’t drive fossil fuel cars, so any hybrids are out. EV’s are my personal transportation method, so it must be a “real” car.

Real cars can drive to places that my neighbors in SoCal drive their cars;

1) Las Vegas – 350 miles
2) San Francisco – 500 miles
3) Lake Tahoe – 600 miles
4) Phoenix – 300 miles

No current or planned EV can meet those needs without a robust, very fast, ubiquitous, RELIABLE, and reasonable cost DC charging infrastructure.

Tesla gets it.

the thing is, if your friends who drive ICEs need to stop for a refill, they be able to stop and refill in 5 minutes and keep going; by contrast, you in your tesla will have to stop every 250-300 miles and wait up to an hour (or more) to recharge before continuing (this assumes that there is no wait for an EVSE station).

the is the main reason why FCEVs are given consideration.

for now, the best option is the PHEV, ideally one build according to GM principles in which the battery is sized to accommodate almost all local driving with a generator that makes the PHEV as versatile as an ICE.

The best option is to electrify the highways themselves, so EVs can charge while driving. It wouldn’t cost much compared to what we spend importing oil.

I was a big PHEV fan 10 years ago, but the complexity and cost of real world PHEVs dissuaded me.

electric vehicles that are powered from the roadway would be an ideal solution.

Don’t like EV range? Don’t like fossel fuel?

Try the new Toyota Mirai which runs with a Hydrogen powered fuel cell.

http://turningpointtour.com/Event

the cost of hydrogen. is nuts. If we can make a light weight tank that can last over 10 years ( see CNG tank inspections) $3000 each tank. compressing stations a small one is $3m to $5m is what we paid for a CNG station. then the size and weight of the tanks. see CNG Honda Civic sales. To maintain the cars and trucks is a joke.
Why the oil lobby wants this.

“110 miles is a very nice improvement, but”

True. 150 to 200 miles would be a game changer, but not 110 miles.

You’re conflating two very different things- people who truly do need to drive more than 80 miles a day versus those who only think they need more range than that for their actual needs. No one disputes that the first category of drivers exist, and current EVs don’t fit for their use cases. However, the reason it’s “mostly” psychological is because we empirically know that most people (about 80%) drive less than 40 miles a day.

Extended range EVs will cover more use cases in the first category, but they more serve to address the “psychological” avoidance of EVs due to perceived range requirements that don’t really exist.

You’ve gone back to the argument of averages, which works very poorly in the real world. If a jack strap company designed for the average use case, their jock straps would have room for one nut, because that’s how many nuts an average human has. A much better way to estimate the useful range for cars is “what is the longest trip you take in a typical three month period”. If the answer is 200 miles, then a 200 mile car is what you should get. It’s reasonable to expect people to rent a car for unusual use cases (as I do when I need to carry 10 people or haul large equipment), but no more than a few times a year. Several times a month is right out.

even this logic is defective. first, with regard to the “longest trip” reasoning: i have had my Chevrolet Volt for 3 years; in that time i have taken one (1) trip of about 1,500 miles round trip. so even 200 miles of range wouldn’t have worked for me in that case. even if i had a tesla model s, i would have had to stop every couple of hours (i did this trip during the winter) for a 1 hour recharge. in the Volt, a stop was about 5 minutes. a second aspect relates to daily driving. it is not sufficient to look at maximum AER alone, because many people want to be able to drive their car each day. in this case, you have to consider the available range, the number of miles that you drive each day, and the number of miles that you can recover by recharging each day. if you use a standard 120v outlet with a level 1 EVSE, a full recharge of a tesla model s would take 2 or 3 days. if the tesla give you a range of 150 miles under the conditions (assuming cold weather) and an overnight charge gets you… Read more »

Then why is GM building the Bolt? Because everyone is not like you. My guess is that they have much more market research than just you have and know what the expected market perpetration should be.

1 hour? You seem to not understand how Supercharging works.

Ok, i expect that renting a car once in three years is aceptable. What was your 2./3./4. longest trip wäre you would have felt uneasy stoping once in 500 miles for around 40 minutes?

John-

Don’t forget that Dave’s car goes further if he doesn’t have friends. Less weight = more range. So, maybe Dave has less range anxiety, due to his psychological circumstances.

I find it interesting that the plain facts of the matter can cause so much bitterness among people! I’ve been driving my 2015 LEAF for approximately 380 days. The odometer says 12,145 miles. So, that makes me very close to “average” daily driving of approx 32 miles per day. I never charge the car at home, I only use the free chargers at my office building and Nissan’s No-Charge-to-Charge stations around the Dallas/Fort Worth metro area. So, my energy cost per mile so far has been $0.00 per mile. That’s pretty compelling. My car rarely leaves Dallas County because I always fly for business or pleasure when I go to a further destination (this was true before the LEAF came along). For my lifestyle and circumstances, the LEAF is an excellent fit (although I wish the front legroom was better!) So, bottom line, you don’t need to insult each other over the plain facts of the matter. The plain truth is that the LEAF is an excellent solution for a segment of the population (and I welcome the range improvements in the future). By the same logic, a quadcab pickup is an excellent solution for a segment of the population.… Read more »

I have two cars, John. For everyday driving, I use my 2015 Leaf (replace the 2011 that I leased due to fear of technology). In any event, I now have a 2015 and have found it gets me almost everywhere I drive to visit family and friends. I’ve scoped out charging stations and have the ability to charge and dine when 70 miles from home and safely make it home again with no worries. If I have to go further, I take the gas car, which I also average over 40 mpg because I don’t drive like a moron.

For perspective, Tesla charges $3,000 to upgrade your 85 kWh battery to a 90 kWh. Roughly similar upgrade in kWh’s.

“Range Upgrade — Upgrade your Model S to a 90 kWh battery for maximum range. Available as an option on all 85 kWh battery equipped cars, this upgrade increases range by about 6%. $3,000”

That would be the benchmark. If Nissan can keep the price difference for the new batteries less than $3,000, then they will be doing well.

$15k-20k?

But I doubt they will do that when the money is in selling a new vehicle.

They said they would, “as long as the pack fits”.

If so, don’t expect them to price it attractively. Every battery pack sold to an existing Leaf owner represents the loss of a new Leaf sold. I expect them to price it high enough to make prospective buyers say “Heck, at that price maybe I’d be better off just buying a new Leaf!”

Only if you think that everyone in a 83 mile LEAF is willing to shell out for a new 110 mile LEAF. I doubt that many of them are.

In fact, it’s more likely the other way around – if you do buy a new car what do you do with the old one? You’ll most likely sell it off cheaply to someone else, someone that might otherwise had bought a new LEAF.

Every case is different, of course, but in my case I will not purchase another Leaf until they assure buyers that they have solved the problem of battery capacity loss by TMS or other means. I will either purchase a 30 kwh battery when my 2012 loses its second or third bar or move to a Volt.

“Next question, what will the price be to upgrade an earlier model to the 30KWHR?”

How much money do you have?

I seriously doubt you will EVER see a higher capacity battery offered for the current generation Leafs.

Congrats InsideEV, dead on !

“The 2016 Nissan Leaf redesign will bring a first to the electric car: your choice of two different batteries.”
—-
Hasn’t Tesla done this since day 1?

I thought the same thing when I first read it, but it’s all in how you interpret the wording. When they say “the electric car”, they are clearly referring to the Nissan Leaf electric car, and not the entirety of the electric car market.

your interpretation is correct. notice that the nissan statement also said: “the majority of electric cars only feature one battery option”; so clearly they are not trying to say that nissan is the *only* car company to offer optional battery sizes.

Plus one…. Currently 3 battery sizes actually…

Yea, even Coda offered two battery sizes (although I don’t know if the larger battery pack ever made it into production). So it looks like they mean it is new to the Leaf.

Just chatted with them, apparently the 110 miles are now EPA certified.

Any word on release date? Nissan and the EV community are losing precious time…

Anyway, kudos once more to insideevs.com, who were spot-on in their news item about this a couple months ago.

Not long. Looking at Nissan’s current production today in Smyrna, I would say (don’t 100% hold me to it) that the first 2016 copies should arrive in the second half of September.

I think the term you are looking for is “don’t super-hold me to that date” 😉

@Jay thanks and kudos again!

@Brian I know I’m missing some joke here. Googling super-hold yields a hair product, and a band (presumably named after the hair product).

It’s Elon Musk and his comment on the Model 3 being shown in march next year. And probably some other time too since he loves to use “super”.

http://insideevs.com/tesla-model-3-reveal-tentatively-set-march-2016/

Could you please explain your thinking regarding “Looking at Nissan’s current production today in Smyrna …”

I do not see any causal relationship here …

One of the Nissan press releases mentioned mid-september, so it’s a pretty safe bet 😉

— quote —
Enhancements for 2016 will be announced closer to its mid-September on-sale date.
— end quote —

Yes, it felt good to see that press blast today….for about two hours. Although as soon as we ran the story, Nissan pulled all the info down and its back to generic talk:

Went from this:
“Enhancements for 2016 will be announced closer to its mid-September on-sale date.”

To this:
“Details on the 2016 LEAF will be available later in the year.”

Not sure if it was because they didn’t want to put that info out yet/blow 2015 MY sales yet, or there was some mistake…we’ll see

Edited Nissan press blast here:
http://nissannews.com/en-US/nissan/usa/releases/the-2016-nissan-lineup-charting-the-changes

A few months ago when I talked with someone from NMAC about extending the lease on my 2013 Leaf, the woman volunteered the information that the 2016 Leaf would “arrive” on Sept. 7. I don’t know if that means “is announced” or “is available” or what, but that’s the closest I’ve heard to an official date.

an extra 25 miles of range is just not a big enough deal to transform the basic characteristics of the car. i can’t imagine this option being worth more than a few thousand dollars. i suspect that they will follow the mercedes-benz model in which all Leaf’s will have a 30kWH battery but software optioning will enable access to the extra 6 or so kWH.

Not saying you’re wrong, but I amazed how fast the dialogue has changed. For years we were confidently told by “industry insiders” that 100 miles of EV range was a psychological tipping point, beyond which there would be mass adoption of PEVs.

But now that three EV makers have announced plans for nominally “200 mile” BEVs, a “mere” 110 mile range Leaf is sneered at.

So what has changed? We are headed north of 100.

my feeling was that the significant threshold would be a PHEV with 100 miles of AER because that would replace virtually all gasoline driving, practically year round. then you would still have a generator for situations in which you drive more than usual or for long trips.

for a phev, yes. But then what is the point of dragging along a gas engine, a gas tank, and all the extra weight? The volt is the proof: mix BEVs and a gas car and you get a car with about half the electric range. That means instead of that PHEV of 100 miles range, you get a 200 mile BEV.

Leave the gas to china, the diesel to europe. We are moving to the future.

I know you prefer otherwise and I have a PHEV myself, but from what I’ve seen the majority of EV owners of any kind would MUCH prefer a BEV over a PHEV. 200 mi seems to be the cutover point for the majority.

PHEV is a crutch and always will be. Too many complications and associated costs/maintenance (in the long term, not short term).

the problem with your reasoning about what EV owners want is that the number of EV enthusiasts are too small in number. in order to make electric vehicles viable as a product offering, *EVs have to expand beyond the EV enthusiast niche.

“So a 100 mile EV is now a 70 mile EV. Now take about 30% off that for winter losses, and you’re at less than 50 miles.”

While one can’t argue with your math, it would be foolish to expect this kind of range loss. Yes, there will be some loss of range over the course of a few years, but most Leaf owners are not going to keep their car for enough years to experience a 30% loss. There will be some outliers of course, but every car model has some lemons.

30% loss of range in the winter? Well yes, but only if you park your car outside and don’t pre-heat the battery pack. Those who park their car in a garage and/or leave it hooked up to the charger overnight shouldn’t experience more than ~20% loss of range in very cold weather.

I call BS on your winter scenario. My car loses about 50% of its range in winter – partly due to the battery holding less energy, partly due to the increase in energy required for motion and heat. And before you mention the heat pump, it buys you nothing in “very cold weather.” Let’s be clear here – for many of us, that expression means sub-zero (F), not just sub-freezing.

The way that cars are used is to drive some place, and then let the car sit for hours until you need to drive it someplace else. In that time, assuming no opportunity charging (a fair assumption for most places), the car will have cooled off and you’ll have to heat it up again once you load your family with small children. For a realistic usage, I would always assume a BEV gets 50% of the rated range in the dead of winter.

I am in complete agreement with you. Winter demands,more from all systems in a car… And I don’t want the car to die in the winter.

And that is exactly why we need global warming! Bring it on, coal power!

Yeah, I lose more than 1//2. Darn dissqus

I’m dubious they know what they are talking about. They may be kept clueless by Nissan. Just reprinting what they heard on the internet. “… we feel …”, suggests they are guessing.

A screenshot of the online order form was leaked. Assuming it’s legitimate, it’s pretty much confirmed now, since dealers are able to order the car. We just need a press release from Nissan to make it official, but I understand their desire to not cannibalize their current sales of their 2015 inventory with too early of a release of information on the 2016 model year.

Yes, screenshot is confirmed. Range is not and whether Nissan is switching battery specs so specify usable vs total. Other rumors said 125 mile range, which would mean that the battery spec must be usable rather than total.

Ha Ha! I visited this dealer when I was looking around doing research on EV’s in general, and planning out my next car purchase earlier this year, not a bad dealer, better than most I visited in the same period. Almost went with the leaf but it’s so ugly and didn’t offer enough range for me as a single car household, still doesn’t sadly. Eventually decided to go with a 2016 Volt.

The 2016 Volt is a sharp looking car.
When do you get delivery of the Volt?

NPNS! SBF!
Volt#671

I’m in Indiana so we probably won’t see Volts on the lots till December or January. I didn’t put any money down or pre-order one because I just can’t bring myself to put money on a car without driving it first. I will be ordering one as soon as I’m done with my test drive though, provided I don’t find any unexpected things I can’t stand in the car.

PHEV’s are a great option for single car households. Especially if your personal driving patterns will put you over 10,000K mile per year in EV mode.

The Leaf statistics for how far Leaf drivers average is around 10,000 miles per year. I suspect that many Leaf owners still drive 12k-15K miles per year like most average cars are driven, but the rest of the miles are driven in a second gas vehicle that the household owns.

The volt is just another hybrid. I don’t ever want gas car stuff again. And when I test drove the 2014 volt it was miserable acceleration, did not even feel safe on a free way, and only had 4 seats instead of 5. So I ended up buying the eGolf which is awesome but range limited to about 80 miles when not driving like a grandma. My next car is a tesla if I can finance it… Never going back to gas cars for sure.

I call BS Michael. Doubt you’ve driven either a Volt or an e-Golf.

0-60 spec for the e-Golf is over 10 seconds.
Gen I Volt is 8.9 seconds.

Most people will disagree with the rest of your “driving impressions” as well.

Is 110 miles way below expectations? Certainly won’t compete in the next couple years. Perhaps the 2017 is the real announcement.

No, the 110 miles wasn’t expected at all (at least not before we started to foreshadow in April, then report in May). This was the quote from April: “Given the density of the next generation cells that Nissan (and LG Chem) are expected to produce, the current 24 kWh pack could be expanded to as much as 36-38 kWh without any significant modifications needed…we feel that something along the lines of 30-32 kWh and 110 miles of new/total range seems like a more reasonable assumption given the low (non-existent) expectation of greater range from the market, and also to maximize the bump for the next generation car in 2017.” And from May: As for the stated increase to 30 kWh for both the SV and SL trims (the S continues to come standard with the 24 kWh battery), there has been no official word from Nissan, but we have heard confirmation now…As for the new battery sizing’s effect on range, we feel the 2016 LEAF (SV/SL) could have an EPA rated range of about 105 to 110 miles.” — The 2nd gen LEAF is maybe what you are thinking of? This 2016 LEAF is an extension of the original car… Read more »

Jay,

I’m curious why you believe there will be no 2017 Leaf and an extended run of 2016s. To my inexperienced mind, it would make more sense to have a 2017 Leaf be basically the same as the 2016. After all, this is done all the time with other models. The 2017 Leaf could have a shortened run, cut off by the 2018 Leaf 2.0. This doesn’t change the timing of Leaf 2.0, BTW. It simply divides the intervening ~18 months into two model years instead of one.

The above narrative makes sense to me, but you have far more experience / insight into the industry. Please help me understand!

Just past precedent/gut instinct I guess…and the fact there is not any real value in two short runs (ala Nissan in 2013-2014) over one long one to end the run. A short “2017 run” would be mostly a gimmick (no changes), and the reality is that the 2016 LEAF offers something substantial to the existing market…and something no other EV maker will the next year and a half. At ~110 EPA miles for ~$33,000 pre-incentive – it will sell on merit. Outside of aesthetics, it will be hard to make the case to buy a VW e-Golf, Fiat 500e Ford Focus EV, Kia Soul EV, etc next month or in a year from now – regardless of the model year tag attached. (I’m not saying it isn’t possible to make the case for other EVs…but a model year switch is unlikely to sway any of those minds) Also, not much sense starting a 2017 MY year run when LEAF v1.0 will likely be out of production by January of 2017, and Nissan will already be well into current gen sell-off mode when these ‘new in name only’ cars would launch. Similar to early leaked news of this version, I’m quite… Read more »

Totally agree. Spot on assessment.

Thanks. Makes a lot of sense. Either way, it’s all marketing 😉 What really matters is that the timing of the Leaf 2.0 doesn’t slip.

i agree that there will be no 2017 Leaf. this is a low volume car; you can’t introduce a new model year with *no* changes from the previous model year, so a 2017 would have to offer *some* new features relative to the 2016. it actually wouldn’t really be that big of a deal to introduce a 2017 model, but at these volumes it makes little economic sense to do so. so holding over the 2016 model and possible introducing an early 2018 model does indeed make the most sense in my view.

the competitive issues are not that significant now because the market is so small and there is no entrenched incumbent with dominant market position. i don’t think that anyone offering a BEV in that time frame is planning on realizing significant (within the context of the automotive market) sales volume right out of the gate.

Jay, any insight on the 2016 Spark EV? I haven’t seen any mention of any specs yet, and I have a sneaking suspicion that GM will surprise us with a longer range battery, bridging the gap to the Bolt in a similar manner as the 110 mile Leaf will bridge the gap to gen 2.0. Nissan is showing their hand, and GM seems to be keeping their cards close to their chest. Just a hunch.

Hey cmg186,

Sure, quite familiar with the Spark EV product. I actually spoke to GM recently about them (2016 Spark EVs)…turns out they currently in shipping and customs limbo for US. ETA is soon-ish/September

Unfortunately (or fortunately if you look at the Spark EV’s demise as paving the way for the Bolt), the 2016 Spark EV will not get the generational upgrade that the 2016 Spark petrol gets, or any significant changes for that matter AFAIK.

Just our own opinion, it appears the South Korea assembly line is pounding out whatever amount of EVs GM thinks it will take to bridge the gap to the Bolt. Once that number is met, we feel that is it for the Spark EV, and it will just make new petrol Sparks there on out. We are going under the assumption there is/will be no 2017 Spark EV.

Jay, agree, but doesn’t that put them behind the Bolt?

Sure.

LEAF 2.0 rough launch plans have been known going on 17 months or so, so it makes sense/is smart for GM to plan beat it out by a bit (~2 to 5 months).

%&^(*&*(& !!!!

Oh, man you ruined my day now.

(searching for a happy pill…)

I want to know if the new battery pack is physically any larger. We can start to get an idea of the annual rate of capacity improvements. My bet is 5%. Certainly not Moore’s, but not too bad.

It’s going into the same battery void as 2011-2015 model years, so it’s not increasing in volume. If anything, I think we will see a weight and volume reduction.

I think the general agreement was they are avoiding a redesign, so no, no bigger.

I looked at Andy Mohr for my LEAF a year ago and they could not have been more disinterested in selling one to me. They said they found an S with cruise and the DC charge port and when I went to sign the papers they said it would be and SV model and more money down or per month. This all took place over a few weeks and bad phone and email contact. Ed Martin Nissan was the cheapest and fastest but Tom Wood was the most knowledgeable about EV’s since they install the charging stations around Indy for advertisement. I would say that my LEAF S in the summer gets over 105 miles per charge consistently and the 110 range would be more like 130 summer and probably 100 in the winter.

the EPA figures for AER are more of a kind of weighted average over the course of a year (much like MPG figures are). you can expect to get more than the EPA figure during warmer months and less during colder months (depending upon where you live).

Understood, I was stating this for the many people that ask me and look for websites for info on the LEAF.

This is a possibility for me.
If they do a decent 2 year lease I might try it. I have an odd driving route as it is 66miles round trip with no destination chargers at the 33 mile turnaround point.

Assuming 100 miles of range, and assuming there is a 30% degradation warranty, you are looking at 70 miles at end-of-life. That doesn’t take into account winter losses.

Anyone considering the LEAF should subtract 30% from the range immediately if they plan on owning the car for long term, because that’s the best case scenario for a vehicle just prior to a warranty claim.

Something that the class-action lawsuit did not address is the reduced practicality of a vehicle with 30% degradation of range, and it’s not something a typical buyer will consider before purchasing.

So a 100 mile EV is now a 70 mile EV. Now take about 30% off that for winter losses, and you’re at less than 50 miles.

Let’s hope for a greater than 110 mile EPA range, because I need at least 55 miles in the worst case scenario for this car to work for long term.

Define “long term”. He’s talking about a two year lease. No way he should see anything like 30% degradation over two years. Should be less than 10%, and his 66 mile commute will be fine even in winter, unless he lives in North Dakota.

Plus, aren’t the owners of the Leafs with the newer lizard battery type getting a much better result when it comes to battery degradation? I thought that the new packs look to take nearly twice as long to get down to 70%, or is that just in the hotter climes?

This is indeed true, and even my 2011 will still go nearly the original EPA range(73mi) in the summer with careful driving. I suspect the 2015s will have 80 mile ranges for ~200K miles.

Ziv,

Random note: InsideEVs has a 2015 Nissan LEAF, but still no where near able to draw conclusions on the new pack. It is just at 11 months/23,000 ~negligible loss

@kubel:
I agree with your math. I can’t vouch for the lizard battery’s degradation, but my 12 Leaf’s batter could only deliver about 36 miles @ 100% during its 3rd winter. This was about 1/2 of the generic EPA rating. I also have the old resistive heater.
Range has improved in the summers, but the battery will have lost 15% capacity by the time it goes back this September.

Nobody should take the EPA rating at face value. I believe the mfrs are hurting EV evangelism by not explaining the facts to people.

According to numerous reports, model year (MY) 2011-2 Leafs have a significantly greater loss of battery capacity over time than MY 2013-4 Leafs.

So yes, anyone buying a used MY 2011-2 Leaf should seriously consider the 30%/30% reduction case. But for newer Leafs, the degradation over time shouldn’t be that rapid.

The relatively rapid degradation of some MY 2011-2 Leaf battery packs is, unfortunately, one example of how EV tech is still in the early adopter stage.

A LEAF has bad karma in Arizona, George.

I live in AZ but not in the hot parts. The battery wouldn’t see any high temps and it would only be a 2 year lease.

Assuming it doesn’t get too cold, when all bets are off, probably depends on the terrain. Best case is you go up going out and then down coming back. That would work well. Going down and then back up not so well. Worst case is a big elevation drop when you start — no regen recovery and you’ll need that coming back up.

I’d say still a little short but possible. Just depends.

Nayhh…I’d say George has to get over that suckie dealer and opt for the 2016 Volt.

There is about a 1500′ climb on the way to Payson. Then a downhill on the way back.

By far, the most interesting shoe yet to drop is price. As I’ve said here before, I expect the SV and SL trim levels to stay the same (possibly with a minor price cut, $1k to $2k, perhaps), and the S to get a big cut to around $25,000. Again, I would point out that Nissan has been selling Leafs with a big discount for at least 6 or 7 months via various NMAC promotions, so I suspect they now have enough of a profit margin that they can kill the deals and simply lower the price. Plus, with the different battery pack sizes they’ll want/need to create more of a price spread between the S and the SV/SL.

Awesome…my 2012 Leaf lease ends in December.

Who wants to predict the percentage of 2016 Leaf lease/sales with the expanded battery pack?

I’ll go first. 14%

I say that because of the forthcoming 200 mile Bolt for similar pricing as the Leaf SL and the fact that most leafs are leased (and the higher-priced models will be less attractive to a person looking for a low monthly lease).

I say 70% of buyers will choose the bigger battery 🙂

I think Nissan leaf sales are going to go up 30% to 40% with the new upgraded batteries. The reason why I don’t see a doubling is that there are still a lot of people that I know who drive at least 70 miles a day. I also once nearly once ended up with a 85 mile around trip job commute. And a 110 mile range would be kind of unpredictable if it goes to 20F in the winter time.

Stopgap. With the 200 mile Bolt around the corner, these are going to face severe depreciation in a short period of time.

It might kill the sales rate, but they will probably do well on leases. A 2 or 3 year lease bridges buyers to see Bolt, LEAF 2.0, and Model 3 before making a buy commitment. The depreciation risk lands on NMAC.

Lease rates better be bottom dollar, otherwise demand is going to fade. 110 miles is still too weak of a range to pull prospective customers into the showroom. Combine that with the expiration of government tax incentives in places like Georgia, as well as the impending arrival of the Bolt with its vastly superior range…. remember the Alamo?

Hey Stuart,

My own 2p, I think the 2016 LEAF you see here (out in ~4 weeks), isn’t looking to compete against the Bolt, or its future self at all (it is hard to gauge the awareness/sensitivity level of the average consumer to those future products)…it is looking to take back ground from all the newcomers that have been picking away at it the past couple years.

1,800 BEVs with ~85 miles of range, not named the LEAF, were sold last month – those are the (real and existing) sales Nissan is likely looking to re-take today, not specifically getting ‘new’ customers in the showroom on the improved specs.

…although I suspect there is still a few people out there that have been waiting on an extra 20-30 miles of range before making a purchase.

We’ll see what happens – I don’t see substantial growth happening for Nissan with these moves. Their pricing strategy will be important – if the entry level comes in at $24,999, it will stir up interest and help hold the line in the short term, but the buzz on the long range affordable EVs like the Bolt will be getting louder and louder and causing many to sit out the EV market and wait. I see little growth in demand for EVs up until the debut of the Bolt. It’ll be the first of a new generation of EV offerings that will be far easier to live with for the average family. IOW, a long-range, affordable Bolt will be worth the wait for many.

Hey again Stuart,

I don’t disagree that the 2016 Nissan LEAF doesn’t open up that much more of an EV market overall. I think that is a reasonable assessment, I believe we are on the same page.

My point is that a 110 mile 2016 LEAF is a significant enough improvement that it makes the other 9 city/85ish mile EVs (that sold 1,800 copies last month) look comparably inferior on that metric.

All BEV drivers have a “buffer range” they are comfortable with before setting out.

So, if you have a car (let say a BMW i3) that has 81 miles of range, you may be comfortable setting out on a 60 mile trip – reserving ~20 miles…as no one actually nets the total value everyday, coasting to a stop on their driveways as the battery has just been exhausted turning in.

Previously, there was no inherit range value of owning a LEAF (at 84 miles) over the i3 (at 81 miles)or really any city EV – it was/is a meaningless difference more or less between the cars.

Now with a 110 mile LEAF, that “usable” number would be 90 miles…or a 50% real world range advantage over the i3.

The difference is too little to make the kind of difference many of us would require or want. Read the comments – quite a few are brushing off the gain as too insignificant. It’s a small step,not a giant leap for mankind…

I live in the Bay Area of California – it’s close to 200 miles to completely circle the bay in a car. A 200 mile BEV is the bare minimum for people here to continue living a full Bay Area lifestyle – going wine tasting, pro ball games, the beach, the airport, to the City & back, etc. etc.

I’m afraid this stopgap of a LEAF is going to appeal to only the anti-GM/die hard Nissan fans. It’s too little, too late – Nissan should have had it available a year ago.

I know its too little for you…or for many who have waited/are waiting.

The point I am making, and what I think Nissan is looking for here, is reclaiming the 1,800 city EVs that were sold last month that weren’t LEAFs.

If next month there is 110 mile LEAF out there, will the 1,800-odd people who buy other city EVs each month now, still buy the Focus EV, the Fiat 500, the VW e-Golf, the Spark EV, etc. despite the 110 mile LEAF’s presence?

I would hazard to say that most of the people who chose one of the several different brands of EVs that totalled 1800 units wanted something different than a LEAF for whatever their reason – brand preference, styling preference, etc.

Looking at the 1800…..

Sales of the KIA Soul EV with its class leading 93 mile range hover at only around 100 units per month, despite positive media reviews of the car.

The Fiat 500e is pretty much a cult machine whose buyers are insistent people who like it for its style. Doubtful prospects for a LEAF even with a few extra miles of range.

The VW Golf is a nice, spacious, well received car in ICE form, and also in EV form. Its 300 unit monthly sales level is probably not going to be impacted much.

BMW and Mercedes customers are not going to allow their brand loyalties to be swayed by a mere 110 mile LEAF.

What else is out there for Nissan to pick at?

Except for the availablility of Chademo vs SAE Combo fast chargers.

Chademo growth is stagnant. SAE QC combo chargers are in expansion mode. Expect the latter to become the standard.

I’ve looked at available chargers in my area and the ones I could use are usually Chadmeo so the SAE CCS charger option is a drawback for me.

That’s not what I’m seeing Stuart. I live in Georgia, Metro Atlanta specifically, and in my area we are still seing good growth in DCQCs. The new ones being installed are sometimes Chademo only, sometimes combo units with both Chademo and CCS. But none, none at all, are SAE CCS units without Chademo. Around here, Chademo is still king of the quick charge.

Yawn… The CCS bullshit isn’t “taking over” (as CCS proponents have been frothing over for years).

CHAdeMO isn’t stagnant, either. It nearly doubled in the past 18 months!

Standards:

***********

1) CHAdeMO – 8549 Worldwide (31 May 2015)

The number of CHAdeMO DC Quick chargers installed up to today is 8549.
— (Japan 5418 Europe 1838 USA 1238 Others 55) update 31 May 2015

Over 200,00 cars worldwide

************

2) SAE CCS Combo1, or “J1772 DC” – approximately 250 in the USA (and worldwide) as of March 2015, and virtually all of these are “dual” chargers with CHAdeMO.

Uses a different plug in Europe (Menekkes CCS Combo2) than the plug used in USA

EVs compatible include (note: not all sold cars are physically equipped with CCS port):

*GM Spark EV – 1,889 US sales cars (adding about 50-100 per month in three CARB-ZEV states only)
*BMW i3 – 7,851 US sales (28 Feb 2015)
*VW eGolf – 668 US sales (28 Feb 2015)

***********

3) Supercharger – 396 stations worldwide with
396 Supercharger stations with 2,167 Supercharger charge points, each with 2-14 stalls at each station, growing fast

6 March 2015 – Total USA:
Stations – 171
Charge points – 1139

Over 90,000 cars worldwide

Is chademo ONLY compatible with the Leaf in the US? If that’s the case, then I don’t like it’s long-term prospects vs several aligned manufacturers on CCS.

There hasn’t been a new chamo quick charger opening in the last four weeks in the United States. They are only putting one new one in every three to five weeks. And 90% of these new quick chargers are opening up in already dense quick chargers locations. So over all the amount of new land area that you can drive your electric car is not growing.

Dude that’s crazy talk. I’m seeing a new Chademo QC unit somewhere in North Georgia every month or so. Not sure where you live, but Chademo is stilll going quite strong here in Georgia.

+1 Henry!

What a loon!!!

I guess the dual CHAdeMO + CCS/SAE Combo DCFC installed in Ritzville, WA (near Spoakane WA) last week was not on your map of DCFC installed in the last four weeks?

(FYI: this was just 1of 3 DCFC installed in Washington state in the last week… not counting deployments in the other 47 states and territories!)

Opinions with out data have no value.

In central North Carolina, Sheetz gas station/restaurants are installing like crazy.

Wow! In southwestern Virginia, just a couple hundred miles away, there is absolutely no expansion of chargers of any kind!

So with a higher KWhr battery, do we still lose the same percentage of range due to winter driving?

My 50 mile round trip commute is easily doable except for last February, one of the coldest months on record here in Ontario.

There were a couple of days where I made it home with < 5%.

Pricing will be important too as we know what the 2016 Volt pricing here in Canada is.

the percentage loss comparing full_charge_to_full_charge should be unaffected. there are “games” that can get played with these things such that you get bogus statistics. for example, bjorn nylund claimed that he only saw a 5%-10% reduction in range in his tesla between warmer months and colder months. the percentage losses reported by nylund are not credible. if you dug into the details of how he derived his numbers i’m pretty certain that such investigation would reveal that this is a sham statistic.

I can’t speak from experience, but at least in theory, a higher capacity battery pack should result in slightly less loss in very cold winter conditions.

Here’s why: Part of the loss comes from running the heaters, both for the battery pack and the cabin. Those heaters will use a fixed amount of energy (electricity), which won’t increase with a higher capacity battery pack. (I’m assuming here that the Leaf’s larger capacity battery pack won’t actually have a larger volume; that seems to be borne out by a comment above that the cavity for the pack inside the car isn’t being enlarged.)

Since the “fixed cost” of heating will be a lower percentage of the capacity of a higher capacity battery pack, that should result in a slight improvement on percentage range loss in very cold weather.

But as they say: “In theory, there’s no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is.” In practice, the only way we’re going to know is to wait for reports from actual owners in real-world driving conditions. That slight improvement might be outweighed by other changes to the car.

your logic is incorrect. the way heating works is that the cabin experiences btu loss at a constant rate. that rate is defined by a parameter referred to as the u-value (which is inversely proportional to the better known r-value). when btu loss is experienced there is also a drop in cabin temperature. so to maintain constant cabin temperature, the heating unit must produce sufficient btu output to offset the btu loss.

in an electric car, the battery pack is likely to be insulated while the cabin is not. so most of the btu loss is going to be due to cabin heat loss. the longer you operate the heating system, the more battery charge is going to be used. since the rate of heat loss is independent of the battery pack size, as the pack size increases, you still experience the same percentage loss in range (which means an increase in the nominal loss in range as the battery pack size increases).

Using winter tires reduces range as well.

I’m curious how they’ll get a 110 mile EPA rating, when simple math would suggest that a 25% bigger battery would get you a 105 mile EPA (that even assumes the pack weighs the same).
Is the 30kWh pack lighter than the old 24kWh? Is regen stronger?

I would bet on regen if anything. They may have also improved on efficiency (lower internal resistance, for example).

As a rule, the holdback/and sometimes depth of discharge cushion gets proportionally smaller when expressed as a percentage in a BEV as the total kWh increased.

(2015 LEAF is ~21.x of 24 kWh total, the 2016 is likely 27.x of 30)

Dead on! Plus the fact that with the same regen C rate would mean more kWH back in the battery.
And a relative lower loss for the same power usage.
And if it comme in the same volume with less weight as suspected elsewhere, it really add together to get in the 110-115 miles range.

Is this really true? I mean, if one creates a larger battery by simply stringing together more cells, then certainly each cell would need to reserve the same amount of energy at the top and bottom. Therefore, the percentage would be exactly the same, and the actual reserved capacity would be 25% larger for a battery which is 25% larger.

Now most likely we are looking at a different chemistry so really all bets are off. Unless you have some inside information the rest of us don’t?

Brian I’m pretty sure that the 30kWh battery will have the same number of cells. Each cell will have 25% more capacity. If no other changes were made the internal parts of the cell would be25% thicker and overall cell size and weight would go up by about 20% as not all components need to increase to provide the extra capacity. There is probably 25% more active surface area in the cell for the same weight and volume in the new design.

Lunch this friday?

Sure! You want to pick the spot this time? I have to get there and back in my Leaf…

84 miles on ~21.5 kWh usable is ~3.9 miles/kWh.

Same efficiency (3.9kWh/mile) with ~27.5 kWh capacity implies 107 miles. (~110 miles, not knowing exact reserve capacity, or if other efficiency changes included. eg: more efficient power electronics in the motor inverter)

Nissan is now using LG for the battery packs. Their pack is 30kWH and they are getting 110 miles. So what percentage of the pack are they using? If it gets 3.5 miles per kWH, that would be 31.4kWH???

Is it 30kWh usable? What is the total size of the pack?

I currently am at 4.5 mile/Kwh. How far will I be able to go? In theory?

New battery, 70F degrees:

24.0kWh total – 100% SOC
22.48kWh stored- 93.7% SOC (21.3kWh usable)
4.0kWh stored – Low Battery Warning (50 GID * 80 wattHours … about 3.1kWh usable)
2.0kWh stored – Very Low Battery Warning (25 GID * 80 wattHours… about 1.4kWh usable)
0.5 kWh unusable- 2.0% SOC (actually triggered by lowered cell-pair voltage, not stored energy)

Measured usable energy by a government lab was 21.3kWh net.

Range at 65mph (100km ground speed) on dry, hard surface level road with no wind or cabin climate control with new condition battery at 70F, no elevation changes, “out-and-back” or loop course to compensate for any wind, battery capacity is “useable” amount, not advertised amount. Ranges are at maximum available charge and EPA rating is the maximum published.

Nissan
LEAF – 4 miles per kWh (250 wattHours per mile) * 21.3kWh = [b]85.2 miles[/b] / EPA 84

At 110 EPA, and presumably similar consumption of 4 miles per kWh, then the battery will be 27.5kWh usable.

Easy to figure out.

The Kia Soul EV is almost identical.

So the Leaf is using 90% + of the battery? That scares me.

what is a GID?

http://www.plugincars.com/battery-capacity-loss-it-really-about-location-location-location-127008.html

“Looking at the GID

In 2011, a clever California-based LEAF owner by the name of Gary Giddings discovered that his LEAF was transmitting a numerical value over its diagnostic port which turned out to be the real available battery pack capacity in watt-hours divided by 80. The LEAF community duly named the unit a GID in his honor.

In a brand new LEAF, the number of GIDs displayed by a GID meter is 282, the equivalent of 22.56 kilowatt-hours. When fully charged, my LEAF reported a total of 278 GIDs, the equivalent of 22.24 kilowatt-hours of stored energy.

Take one from the other, and you’re given a true figure of the capacity loss due to aging. The answer? Just 0.32 kilowatt-hours, or a little less than 1 percent.”

– “While there are many features that make the Leaf a popular vehicle, there is one thing it’s known for above all else: its battery.”

It sure is, and not in a good way, but they say it like it’s a Good Thing.
It’s also nice to see it comes with a CVT and 50 State Emissions 😉

No CVT, that is just a quirk of the Nissan online system that doesn’t have a proper placeholder the single reduction gear.

…only really the battery, some options changes (ie the SV gets standard CHAdeMO) and colors are changes this year

CVT you say…intriguing

While not a show-stopper, the 110 mile range might be just enough to convince a couple of my friends that were on the fence about 84 miles being enough.

That said, I look forward to a 150+ mile range model. Oh, and decent looks next time, Nissan.

I don’t expect them to sell many 24kwh cars in Canada. I’m torn between trading off my 2014 LEAF for a 2016 or waiting for the 2017. I would love the extra range in winter. They shouldn’t offer 2 battery choices until range gets over 160 Km – 200 Km range especially if it’s just battery chemistry. Seems pretty backwards if they want to push technology forward unless they are just trying to push old battery stock from the 2015 builds. Every LEAF owner would love to hear that all replacement packs in the future would be with the new chemistry instead of the old.

I wonder what psychological effect it will have on American consumers when the EPA rated range is finally 3-digits. I would think anything over 100 miles will do well.

As much as I like Nissan sticking with BEVs– they’ve been very very conservative over updating their vehicles looks and battery tech / range, since introduction.

While I’m happy to see ANY range increase in a popular BEV, I’m hoping Model X / Bolt / Pajan, etc., puts some fire under their butts to get a Leaf with near 300 mile range, at a reasonable prices, for the global masses.

hoping, sorry. 😛

Nissan’s pricing will be interesting. Will the high end models stay the same price as they are today; $35k for the top model Leaf SL with 30kw battery? Or will the price go down? And how much cheaper does the Leaf-S entry model with a 24kw battery get?

The other problem Nissan faces is that customers are convinced these cars should be leased, not bought, partly since the battery life is unknown, and partly because buyers expects cheap 200-300 mile range cars in a couple of years. Nissan is getting stuck with a lot of returned used lease Leaf’s, which have poor residual value.

I wonder if EV shoppers will be moving into the same quandary that PC shoppers were in from about 1995 till 2010 ….

Between battery upgrades and autonomy upgrades and cell phone/ network upgrades…. it seems like anything you buy might be pretty out of date in less than 2 years.

… add,…. this quandary should, of course, mean a strong 15 year run for insideevs.com.

(think of all the PC magazines that were sold …)

Personally I think it’s a urban myth that a PC that you buy will be out of date in two years. In that I have a PC that has gone seven years without any hard were and soft were upgrades and it still handles programs fine 80% of the time. The only thing that is making me start upgrading it to something with far more power. Are these two or three programs that I have that stress out the old system. But otherwise I would have no trouble keeping it running another few years.

How this relates to EV’s as the ranges go up on the newer models of EV’s over time car buyers will worry less and less about range. Much like a more powerful and faster computer will meet more and more of people’s needs. You soon reach a point were a super high range EV or super powerful and computer soon is able to out do your wants in want you want to do with it.

Indeed. I’m still using a Mac Mini from 2010 as my main workhorse, video editing, etc. It still performs everything fine. Only thing upgraded has been RAM and software.

It’s not (wasn’t) urban myth. There WAS a time when the useful PC upgrades were coming fast and furious ….

PC obsolescence is obsolete
http://www.extremetech.com/computing/134760-pc-obsolescence-is-obsolete

This scenario isn’t hard to imagine in the coming years for EV’s.

This year it’s 110 miles range, next year 150 miles. Year after that 200 miles.

Level 2 charging, … DC quick charging, … Super(type) charging, … wireless charging.

Self parking, …. lane keep assist,… adaptive cruise control, …full on autonomy while on the interstate, … full on autonomy in certain city sections, … full on autonomy on 85% of the roadways, … etc…..

These are all USEFUL desirable upgrades that everybody’s going to want.

… oh yeah,…. and I left out all the performance upgrades.

Bigger motor(s) , much quicker 0 to 60 times, all wheel drive. BEV Mustangs and Camaros can’t be that far off.

Remember, desktop/laptop computers improve (or at least, were improving) according to Moore’s Law. Battery chemistry does not. As I recall, Elon Musk said very recently that we should expect the Tesla Model S battery pack to increase in capacity by about 5% every year. That’s a lot slower than Moore’s Law.

For non-Tesla EVs, the real question is affordability. The reason that all these EV makers are suddenly planning to market PEVs with significantly increased range is because LG Chem has had some breakthrough allowing them to make li-ion battery cells at a significantly lower per-kWh cost. Hopefully Tesla’s Gigafactory will allow Tesla to have a similar cost reduction.

So, it’s a price reduction which has caused Nissan to plan on doubling the range of the Leaf. Don’t expect to see that kind of range increase within a two year time span again, at least not until there is another quantum jump improvement in battery chemistry.

The Return of the EV Bestseller King! I want one, but where is my loved ocean blue!

nothing new this is expected

what needs to be done is a good design

i dont have faith in nissan since they dont make good looking cars so wont even care for the new leaf (Unless they surprise me, which i doubt)

for the EV enthusiast segment, design doesn’t matter that much. look at the toyota prius; i certainly wouldn’t call that a “well designed” car, but the design hasn’t hurt it in the market segment where it has appeal.

Wonderful news! But it’s just one more case of other EV makers playing “Follow the leader”, with Tesla in the lead. Quoting from the article: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 2016 Nissan LEAF Changes “While there are many features that make the Leaf a popular vehicle, there is one thing it’s known for above all else: its battery. The 2016 Nissan Leaf redesign will bring a first to the electric car: your choice of two different batteries. The standard Leaf will come with the same battery as the 2015 model, featuring an EPA-estimated driving range of 84 miles. Drivers of higher trim levels will enjoy a battery with as much as 25% increased capacity, delivering a driving range of as much as 110 miles. The majority of electric cars only feature one battery option, and by providing drivers with their choice of a lower capacity battery if they don’t intend to drive long distances, the new Leaf can find a home in even more garages.” ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [end quote] Wow. Whoever wrote this is clearly ignorant of the subject. 1. Of course this isn’t “a first”. The Tesla Model S has two battery sizes… as just about anyone interested in EVs already knows. 2. What… Read more »

How is the CVT transmission going to affect range. Current LEAFs only have reduction gear. Shouldn’t a CVT transmission increase range beyond the 25% gained with a larger capacity battery.
Sorry if I missed comments about this already.

Good eye Bruce.
That CVT option is a sleeper. It went right over my head.

If indeed the new Leaf will have a CVT that is a very big deal as it would allow nissan to keep the motor closer to peak efficiency all the time and that would increase range.

That is as big a news as the battery. The only problem is the CVT will add cost.

It seems very far fetched that Nissan would go away from their simple gear reduction set though. It makes me think that the little selection box was something the dealer dreamed up….not Nissan.

Hey Jay,
anyway to check out this CVT thing?

It absolutely will NOT have a CVT. they rob a lot of power, and are suited to a gasoline engine that needs to be at a certain RPM to make max power or efficiency,

One speed, simple gear reduction, same as now.

That would be my guess also but again we have nothing to verify it as right or wrong.

Sorry George, I missed this earlier. No CVT, its a pretty well-known bug in Nissan point of sale system.

OK thx

I was joking when I mentioned it in an earlier post 🙂
They had some ICE remnants on their page: CVT and 50 state emissions.

the planetary gearset in a Chevrolet Volt is effectively a CVT, one that kicks in to keep the traction motor rpm from straying into the range where the traction motor becomes less efficient.

Brian asked:

“Is this really true? I mean, if one creates a larger battery by simply stringing together more cells, then certainly each cell would need to reserve the same amount of energy at the top and bottom.”

I was very surprised to read Jay Cole’s assertion that larger battery packs use a lower percentage reserve. That’s the first I’ve heard of that.

But perhaps so. Part of the reserve is for non-drive-train power. Powering the headlights, stereo, interior lights, etc. As I recall, in the Tesla Roadster, 1/11 of the battery pack was wired to power that other stuff, and couldn’t even be used to power the drivetrain at all. I don’t know that newer EVs are wired that way. The fact that using the cabin heater or A/C reduces range rather suggests that at least those are taking power from the main part of the pack.

Anyway, I’d certainly like to see Jay address this question. I’m sure he can provide a better informed answer than I can.

From what I understand it’s not a percentage but a certain amount of energy that has to be left in.
As a clue, the Tesla 85 seems to use close to 80 kWh of energy before being “exhausted” while if it has to retain a percentage like the Leaf you would only have 74 kWh to use.
Not sure and only speculating though!
But that would correlated Jay comment.

If it’s true, it’s probably because the larger batteries will receive many fewer full discharges. Drivers will likely completely discharge an 80 mile battery on a daily basis, but only completely discharge a 300 mile battery once a month. That means that the larger battery is already more phobampered.

Phobampered = pampered. My baby hit the keyboard right when I hit post! Unfortunately, there’s no way to edit and correct. At least it’s a mildly amusing new word. 🙂

You are correct in stating that a larger battery will be cycled less often, however your numbers are quite the exaggeration. Simple math implies that your idea of a “month” is less than 4 days long…

Pretty sure that sales of 24kW battery will be really small. If you are into getting it cheap, there is plenty used to choose from. One point bringing the 30 kW battery is offering upgrade to already sold Leafs. That is showing to consumers that Leaf does not die with battery, but had a double life vs ICE. They will still be offering this battery long after 2.0 is introduced. Maybe even it shall be base version battery for 2.0 as for many pricepoint is crucial and range enough with 30 kW as well. This would also keep volumes high to keep costs low. 5000 for new 30 battery in exchange for old would give confidence to buy a new EV. Nissan would be the first to give affordable replacement pack. What they will never do is giving residual for old pack depending on it’s condition. It shall be fixed amount regardless of condition.

Nonsense! 20 miles more range, EPA, isn’t enough range to sell the car to Joe, the average motorist. At this point only Alfonse, the engineer, and early adopter, will get excited and pay the premium to drive 10 mile further roundtrip.

200 mile, EPA, is a minimum range for this car and Nissan has been remiss in waiting so long to develop it.

There’s been 2 people today (myself one) commenting that have said that this upgrade results in 2 potential new buyers.

If Nissan offers the 30kwh “lizard” pack as an upgrade to older Leafs, picking up a used ‘pre-lizard’ Leaf might be a pretty good deal. I’ve seen low mile models going for $11,000.

The key is to find out ASAP if they will do that then go buy a used one. Once the word gets out, the price will jump.

My 2015 S has 15,400mi on it and showed 292 gids when new, 100% charge today gets it 288 gids, so we are talking about <2% loss. I bought it in 8/14 and since it was made in 4/14, my battery has seen 2 summers so far. I also live in a fairly warm area of CA! So I'd say the new battery chemistry introduced in 2015 and likely the same as in the larger pack, is doing quite well!

My new Kia Soul EV has now consistently (= 5000 km driven) 200 km range from 100% to 0%, so 180 km = 111 miles from 100% to 10%, in summer, with 1 person and luggage in the car and with lots of mountains (I live in the Alps) and secondary roads, but not many motorways. It has 27 kW usable. The 2016 Leaf, with 27,5 kW usable, will be very close.

This range is now enough to not only commute but do all travel, including holidays, with fast chargers (chademo) in all of France (where I live), apart from the southeastern Alps, where chademo is yet too sparse. I use it as my only car.

Probably better because of best aerodynamic.

A leaf has a CVT?

Yes, a CVT, a Car and Vehicle Technice, also known as radio. Lol

No!
And it doesn’t need one.
It’s a final reduction ration or single gear reduction.
CVT are useless for any well design electrical motor.

I meant ratio!

My take: My lease is up on my 2013 Leaf next year.

Most likely I will try for a one year extension, and kick it into 2017.

I think the Bolt will eat the Leaf’s lunch. I would gladly pay the extra 5k-10k to get into the 200 mile range.

In a poll I ran on MNL only 2% people picked Bolt over Leaf MY16/Leaf 2/Model 3.

For me it won’t be Leaf/Bolt/Model III, but CHAdeMO/CCS/Superchargers. Over 150 miles, infrastructure is far more important than range. In upstate NY and northern New England, it is currently Superchargers by a landslide. CHAdeMO is starting to pick up. CCS is still just a dream.

Not true in Phx.
We don’t have a SC on the east side up hwy 87 to Payson.

If I need a jump the Chadmeo at Riverside Toyota supposedly had 20 kw

but if I want to run to Phx from payson there is nothing. Tesla badly needs an east side Phx charger

One more advantage of 30 kWh which I don’t think anybody has mentioned ….. battery life.

It should be easier to charge to 80% (vs 100%) more often than with the 24 kWh battery, thus extending the life of the battery.

Price will have to stay unchanged for SL and SV to compete with Kia that already has 27kWh.
The Leaf S trim level should be avoided if at all possible. Lower range, no heat pump cabin heater and 3.3 kW charger. In fact there should be a disincentive for manufacturers to offer less than 6.6 kW chargers. These low charging rates contribute to lineups at Level 2 chargers

I think Leaf 16 will sell very well, better GM release some info to Bolt. My thesis, Bolt will not have 200 miles Epa range ! Thats the range of a Model S60, 200 miles will be optimum and combined Epa around 165 miles.
GM can’t conjure, or the Bolt is equipped with steel wheels, no DC port, no heat pump… (37.000 Dollar) and higher trim 43.000 Dollar.

The CVT would help the Leaf driving over 50mph
The 2013 Leaf that we own is horrible range over 50mph

I’ve had no problems with driving up to 65 mph have a dramatic impact on my range. True, it’s better at 60 and even 55, but I’ve never even considered having to drop to 50. I use ECO mode and the new B gear. I easily get 90 miles on a charge. My wife, on the other hand, gets much closer to 70. Driving habits do matter.