UK Pricing Reveals 30 kWh 2016 Nissan LEAF Costs Just £1,600 More Than 24 kWh Version

SEP 14 2015 BY MARK KANE 23

2016 Nissan LEAF

2016 Nissan LEAF

The 2016 Nissan LEAF will be available in Europe in three trim levels – Visia, Acenta and Tekna.

In the UK, Visia is 24 kWh only, while Acenta and Tekna can be ordered with 24 kWh or 30 kWh pack.

Difference in price between 24 and 30 kWh versions is £1,600 (less than $2,500)

Nissan’s press release presents prices with VAT, first reg fee of £55 and Plug-in Car Grant (PiCG) incentive (for LEAF is 35%, up to a maximum of £5,000).

In both Acenta and Tekna trims, the difference between 24 and 30 kWh is £1,600 (less than $2,500).

If we move one step further – the additional 6 kWh costs just over $410/kWh more (on the consumer level with taxes).

UK Pricing For 2016 Nissan LEAF

UK Pricing For 2016 Nissan LEAF

Categories: Nissan

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

23 Comments on "UK Pricing Reveals 30 kWh 2016 Nissan LEAF Costs Just £1,600 More Than 24 kWh Version"

newest oldest most voted
David Murray

Of course, one has to wonder. Since the battery is the same physical size as the previous one. Does it actually cost any more money to manufacture the larger capacity version? Or is it just extra profit?

Ocean Railroader

I think it’s 95% pure profit unless there is some type of very hard to find super marital in the battery pack.


I agree its extra profit. The new battery pack usses 8 cell modules, which I would say are double the hight of the old 4 cell modules. Thus saving material and manufacturing costs. Less modules means less packing, less connectors, less conductors to connect the modules.

Than there is a question if the old design of 4 cell modules wasn’t a mistake, because the modules are always in pairs on top of each other in the pack. So a single module of double the height would be a better solution.


“modules are always in pairs on top of each other in the pack”

Not only are they pairs, but they are 2 different modules that are paired. The different modules have terminals reversed to simplify the wiring.

By combining the 2 modules, the battery new consists of 24 supermodules that are identical and use less packaging.

Calling the old design a mistake is overly harsh, but the new design is definitely more optimized.


Given the active materials are different, I would not automatically assume it would cost the same or less to make the cells (in this case 2 cells vs 1 cell).

You can look at the 18650 market. The high density cells do not cost the same or less than the lower density cells. The $/kWh is better, but the cost per cell is still higher.

Higher rated cells will cause more cells failing the quality tests at the beginning, it needs some time to optimize the production.
Initial production will definitely be more expensive.


I think it’s more complicated than cost of materials and manufacturing. R&D is a huge expense that is spread out over the course of the run of the vehicle, and there’s less room to spread the R&D costs of the 30kWh battery since LEAF 2.0 is expected in mid-2017.

Also, Nissan needs a 24kWh battery supply to replace 24kWh degraded batteries. It doesn’t make sense to upgrade them to a 30kWh battery, because 1) the customer didn’t pay for it, and 2) it would deincentivize upgrading to the next model, and 3) people would bitch and complain who already got 24kWh replacements.

This battery is 3 years late:

Remember this?

And this isn’t the latest technology available to Nissan.

They can already double that battery to 60 kWh in the same size.

Amprius is a battery manufacturer partner of Nissan and already makes this kind of battery. Second generation NMC batteries.

They still use NMC for the cathode but use silicon for the anode, instead of graphite that Nissan uses in the 30 kWh battery.

Nissan is just a follower, not a leader in electric mobility. They are waiting for Tesla Model III.


You can call them whatever you want but there is nobody else (save Tesla) with a rated range that large. It takes a significant amount of testing to verify that a new battery design will work properly in a car.


Pedro said:

“And this isn’t the latest technology available to Nissan.

“They can already double that battery to 60 kWh in the same size.

“Amprius is a battery manufacturer partner of Nissan and already makes this kind of battery. Second generation NMC batteries.”

Just because some company has demonstrated they can make a battery cell with a certain specific energy (or energy density), doesn’t necessarily mean they can manufacture it at a competitive price. EV makers don’t put the most expensive, cutting edge batteries into their cars. They choose batteries for a balance of characteristics, including longevity, energy density, power density, ability to charge relatively quickly, and price. Of these qualities, price is generally the most important.

I only named Amprius because it’s not vaporware, they are already selling top quality batteries for Android smartphones and tablets. And as a Nissan partner, Nissan can use their technology to produce the batteries themselves.

This PDF will open many people eyes.

Tesla Motors is the one manufacturer that is interested in selling EVs.

Yet, regarding traditional car companies Nissan is the that sucks less.

Pedro, That PDF you cite says absolutely nada about Amprius’ batteries being ready to be manufactured in volume for EVs. I’ve led, and been involved in, various private-sector R&D efforts, both with and without partner collaboration and government funding. I have a lot of experience reading these type of reports, and that slide deck describes an applied research effort which is going well so far, and its main purpose is to demonstrate to the funding agencies that work is proceeding according to plan. That in no way belittles Amprius or what they’ve done, but completing 18 prototypes for testing by a partner in no way says you’re ready to start manufacturing the millions of cells you need to make batteries for 100Ks of cars per year (or even 10Ks). If you have sources to support that assertion, please cite them, but according to that presentation, that’s not part of the project — Nissan is providing some advice, presumably on EV reqs, but Amprius will at most be a cell manufacturer, not a battery vendor for the EV market, as opposed to mobile-device batteries. That makes sense, given the relative cost/size of the battery types. Amprius is just a startup, and… Read more »

Both Nissan and GM claimed they will have 200mile EVs soon. In order to do that they need to raise the Wh/kg rating a lot above their current EVs. This 30kWh battery is stop gap only.

Does anyone know more about the new LG technology that the new cars will be based on?


It is remarkable that no details about LG Chem’s new cells have yet been made public. Clearly NDAs are in place with all their customers, and clearly those are being enforced rigorously.

It seems pretty obvious to me that they have a significantly lower per-kWh price, because so many EV makers are rushing to use them. But beyond that, we’d just be guessing about the characteristics.


Agreed … I expect an interesting contest in the next few years, between LG and Panasonic.

Tesla is betting that incremental improvements of Panasonic technology will win the day. Other OEMs are betting on LG.

In cars because of the reduced space Wh/l is more important than Wh/kg.

The old 24 kWh battery has an energy density of 317Wh/L.

NCA cells that Tesla uses are 650 Wh/l.

Second generation NMC cells that Amprius already sells for smartphones are 700 Wh/l.

These second generation NMC cells with silicon anode are the ones LG Chem will use for the Chevrolet Bolt.

A larger capacity battery despite weighting more can contribute to a more efficient car, because of the Ragone curve.

That Nissan Leaf concept with 338 mile range that we saw, could be already on sale if Nissan wanted to sell electric cars.

mr. M

True, ragone is underestimated.



It is not clear from your comment that you understand Ragone charts.

Choosing an EV battery is a multi-variable optimization. You have to consider weight, volume, energy, power, max charge/discharge rates, efficiency and cost.

When Chevy and Nissan upgrade to 200 mile range from the current Spark and Leaf, they will need to improve both Wh/kg and Wh/l a lot.

You already bashed Nissan in each of your two posts here. That point is already made.

But if you have some information to share about future battery technology, it will be much appreciated.


Nissan sold globally around 40 % of every EV, nearly 200.000 Leaf. Leaf is available in 42 markets! They want to sell EVS like no other traditional car manufacturer! They have the capacity to produce 400.000 EVs per year, they produce in Japan, China, England and US! Sure they want also to sell their gasoline cars, so they have a conflict. But their is only one car manufactur who want to sell more EVs, Tesla.
And for the second LEAF they must have something new (more range), so i can fully understand Nissan. Also from Elon Musk we hear that the Japanese engineers want to test new technology 1000 times before series production. Sure Nissan don’t want to have battery issues like with early Leafs.




Pedro said:

“In cars because of the reduced space Wh/l is more important than Wh/kg.”

Yes, absolutely. Bigger batteries require the car to be bigger, which drives up the cost of the car pretty rapidly. Heavier batteries don’t make nearly as much difference.

But cost per kWh is also very important; certainly more important than weight/mass.


Using silicon instead of graphite as anode does not only increase energy density but also reduce costs.

More info:

I wish that insideevs would make less drag racing video posts and more articles about battery breakthroughs. There is a lot to learn that car companies don’t want us to know. I’m not talking about vaporware but real batteries that already exist.


Hmmmm … careful with statements like “Heavier batteries don’t make nearly as much difference” or “But cost per kWh is also very important; certainly more important than weight/mass”

Weight, volume and cost have to be viewed in context. There may be a car where your statement is true, but it is not universal.

BMW decided to use carbon fibre on i3 and i8 to save weight, not volume or money.

Ford and Tesla are making vehicles from aluminum to save weight, even if it costs more money.