Chevy Bolt concept - 200 mile range, $30,000

[mtdoc]

There has been a lot of bullshit spread around about the batteries, people saying they won't last. There are people pushing a lot of miles on Leafs, using them as taxis, and they have no problems with degradation. Tesla state that their cells are rated for 3000 full cycles, which is 900,000 miles, and they have tested up to 750,000 miles with 86% capacity remaining.

Its is unreasonable to extrapolate what might happen to a Leaf battery pack based on experience with the Tesla ones. The Tesla packs are far more complex, because Tesla think the simpler type of pack in the Leaf will be troublesome.

I don't know anything about the Leaf's battery pack but the Volt's battery pack and it's management is extremely sophisticated and conservative. The car is engineered to only use the middle 65% of capacity under normal conditions. The cooling system and electronics has some pretty amazing engineering.

There are already people who have put 75,000 electric miles on their battery packs without any noticeable degradation in range or performance. The battery and Voltec drive train are warrantied to 8 yrs/100K miles.

Here's a fascinating youtube Volt battery pack video teardown and engineering discussion. There's a fair bit about the electronics that begins around the 6 minute mark. I assume some of the same ideas will be incorporated into the new Bolt.

[MacAttak]

The Leaf packs are pretty barbaric actually. Nissan's approach was cheaper battery that fails sooner. It lacks the conditioning, safety and charge balancing systems found in the Tesla packs. But those systems also greatly increase the cost of the system. So Tesla = probably never have to change the battery pack for the life of the car, and if you do then it's going to be expensive, and Leaf = battery will need to be refurbished every few years, but it's cheap (on the order of ICE maintenance costs when engine/transmission needs major work).

I'm not familiar with the Volt/Bolt battery packs.

[mtdoc]

EVs like the Leaf have far less to go wrong with them - no gear box, no fluids, no spark plugs, no pistons, no exhaust, no turbos, no fuel injection system, no catalytic converter etc.

Yeah, that's what most people don't realize. The cost of driving an EV is lower not just because of not buying gas but because maintenance and repair costs are minimal. Even with my Volt - since I drive it 99& of the time electric only - the ICE in it gets almost no wear.   And with regenerative braking my first brake job will likely come at 200K miles.

[dannyf]

I like to travel in comfort and style.

Isn't that kind of difficult to do in your el cheapo Leaf?

Or your sense of "comfort and style" is vastly different from the rest of ours'?

[tom66]

Isn't that kind of difficult to do in your el cheapo Leaf?

Or your sense of "comfort and style" is vastly different from the rest of ours'?

Not everyone is that bothered about not driving in a luxobarge.

I probably wouldn't buy a Model S because it's too big. I hope the Model 3 is a smaller four door saloon or estate (though I do not like the tall city cars like the Leaf & i3.)

[Skimask]

What do you mean by a Wide Open Throttle switch?  Does it have nitrous?

Just what I said...a wide open throttle switch.  The carb doesn't have a throttle position sensor, only a W/O/T switch.
Most vehicles these days have a TPS to switch from closed-loop to open-loop modes, a bit more power, lower the chance of detonation, etc.  Mine has a physical switch.

[Skimask]

The car is engineered to only use the middle 65% of capacity under normal conditions.

Aha!  That right there changes my thinking about being able to squeeze a bit more life out of battery packs.  I was under the impression that EV's/hybrids used the battery from top to bottom, from 99% down to 1% and back up again.  Didn't realize they hung out in the middle where things are all candy and lollipops (no idea what that means, but it sounds good).
Now I wonder if they've got some sort of hidden emergency mode where they'll let you actually use the batt pack from the top all the way to dead,..with some sort of crazy warning on the HUD that you'll likely do permanent damage to the pack and have to pay thru the nose to undo said damage.

[dannyf]

from 99% down to 1% and back up again.

Nope. What's why going down to 80% is a significant performance hit.

Something a certain Leaf owner failed to comprehend.

[tom66]

Wasn't the issue with Leaf batteries losing capacity bars only actually an issue in Arizona with average highs of ~45C? Has since been fixed by altering the chemistry used.

There is a Tesla Model S with over 150,000 miles on it, and the battery has 95% of original remaining capacity. The Roadsters managed 85% after 100,000 miles. Any concerns about battery capacity fade are poorly founded, in my mind. The rest of the vehicle is likely to experience mechanical failure before the battery dies.

[coppice]

LOL, yeah okay, that explains why no Leafs have had their battery packs replaced even though they have been running for more than a few years. Also, the pack's warranty is longer than that 

You bought the rubbish printed in the press. Fortunately it is dying down now that time has proven it all to be nonsense.  The packs are quite high end. Air cooled, and similar to the Tesla packs they are sub-divided and managed/conditioned individually. Nissan spent a lot of time developing the safety system that both prevents over-current and over-heating conditions and isolates the pack in the event of a serious accident.

Nissan sell batteries for $4,000. No-one has bought one. Comparable costs for an ICE engine tend to be considerably higher on a similar price/spec car. As I mentioned, a recent design defect on BMWs costs 3x as much to fix and that's only a single part of the complex system. EVs like the Leaf have far less to go wrong with them - no gear box, no fluids, no spark plugs, no pistons, no exhaust, no turbos, no fuel injection system, no catalytic converter etc.

Although the current picture is not looking too bad for the Leaf's battery performance in the real world, the above is total BS. How could any Leaf battery have been in use for "more than a few years" when they only went on sale 4 years ago. No replacements sounds odd, too. If thousands have been sold, you would expect to find the occasional faulty unit being replaced, even if they work really well. A quick scan of the web shows this is the case. Statements from Nissan are evasive enough to put potential buyers off, but they do admit "refurbishing" some batteries. Of course they haven't sold any replacement batteries - you said yourself that they are still all under warranty. Nissan has repurchased a small number of cars under the US lemon laws, after complaints of falling capacity, without admitting why.

Some of Nissan's claims are really iffy. They state expected rates of battery degradation based on never going above 80% charge. Their range figures are base on 100% charging. That's devious. The don't clearly state how much a hot climate will reduce battery life, although the figures are buried somewhere. Temperature is a big factor in battery degradation, and a high percentage of the complaints about battery degradation are from hot climates, like Arizona.

Tests, which appear to be independent of Nissan, show that some of the complaints about falling battery capacity are actually caused by poor sensors in the car. These appear to overestimate the fall in capacity. Nissan refused to confirm that, but have changed the sensor in newer cars to avoid the problem they haven't admitted. Wouldn't it be in their interests to own up to that one?

All in all, from what I could find, I'd say Nissan are evasive but not actually doing a bad job.

[tom66]

Tesla state range from 100% to car stopping dead, but encourage drivers to only use 10% to 90% range for daily driving.  Warranty valid regardless, covering total or substantial battery failure, although no guarantee on capacity...

You can't use all the way down to dead, about 5kWh is reserved on bottom end and the cells only charge to 4.16V.

[dannyf]

£32k is not a cheap car.

From the same guy who doesn't understand return on investments, nor a simple car loan?

Read the link you posted about your el cheapo Leaf and you will get a sense of the car's selling price, if you can comprehend that page.

[Wilksey]

They only make one model Nissan Leaf right?

I don't remember it being able to blow the skin off a rice pudding let alone being able to "blow away" BMW's and Civics, from the one I test drove it was slow as f*k!  That was just under a year ago, March '14, I wasn't planning on buying it, just wanted to see what it was like to drive, yes it was smooth, interior wasn't too bad, bit for 30k I'd expect a battery operated hand to come out with a leatherette cloth and gently polish my genitals, one feature it didn't have.

And it definitely is not a cheap car, it's extortionately expensive!

[dannyf]

The only chance a Leaf will blow the doors off a BMW or a Civic is falling off a cliff, :0

I think you would have more comfort and style than Leaf if you travel in a golf cart.

[dannyf]

They only make one model Nissan Leaf right?

There is a Leaf R - where R stands for R@#$%#,

[bushcrafter]

dare i say it ? only a NUT would buy a Bolt.

 

[MacAttak]

The Leaf packs are pretty barbaric actually. Nissan's approach was cheaper battery that fails sooner. It lacks the conditioning, safety and charge balancing systems found in the Tesla packs. But those systems also greatly increase the cost of the system. So Tesla = probably never have to change the battery pack for the life of the car, and if you do then it's going to be expensive, and Leaf = battery will need to be refurbished every few years, but it's cheap (on the order of ICE maintenance costs when engine/transmission needs major work).

LOL, yeah okay, that explains why no Leafs have had their battery packs replaced even though they have been running for more than a few years. Also, the pack's warranty is longer than that 

You bought the rubbish printed in the press. Fortunately it is dying down now that time has proven it all to be nonsense.  The packs are quite high end. Air cooled, and similar to the Tesla packs they are sub-divided and managed/conditioned individually. Nissan spent a lot of time developing the safety system that both prevents over-current and over-heating conditions and isolates the pack in the event of a serious accident.

Nissan sell batteries for $4,000. No-one has bought one. Comparable costs for an ICE engine tend to be considerably higher on a similar price/spec car. As I mentioned, a recent design defect on BMWs costs 3x as much to fix and that's only a single part of the complex system. EVs like the Leaf have far less to go wrong with them - no gear box, no fluids, no spark plugs, no pistons, no exhaust, no turbos, no fuel injection system, no catalytic converter etc.

That information comes from casual remarks made by members of my local EV Club, the majority of whom drive Leafs. It does not come from anything printed in the press. Most (almost all) are leased, with quite a few coming up for lease termination soon. They are all happy with their car but even happier to have leased it. They all plan to lease one again - or at least I know of nobody who intends to walk away from the lease and get something other than another Leaf (except for one guy who has a Model X reserved - around number 200 on the waiting list).

It is a fact that the battery management system in the Leaf is not very advanced. The batteries WILL suffer from this. A common hashtag around here in the winter is #leaflife where people post selfies of them bundled up head to toe just to drive to work because their Leaf's range is derated so badly in the cold that they can't run the cabin heater. That kind of abuse shortens the life of the cells, and from what I've heard people lose several percent of range per year at normal mileage levels (10k-15k per year).

On the other hand, the worst case of range derating with a Tesla I know about is a guy in my local Tesla group who is a travelling salesman with over 100,000 miles already (just under 2 years) on his Model S, and he has seen about 3% loss in range in total.

I have no bone to pick here, I think the Leaf is a fine car. We even considered getting one to replace our 6-month old BMW 550i (that we HATE), but now am leaning towards just getting a second Model S instead... perhaps a S85D or maybe even a P85D to go with our P85+.

[MacAttak]

Nope. What's why going down to 80% is a significant performance hit.

Nope. There is an option to only charge up to 80% if you want to preserve the battery, but in practice it makes little difference and I rarely bother with it. It's only of concern if you are in for the very long haul.

And, unlike what you need to do to preserve a an ICE engine (not revving it too hard) there is no performance penalty. I can blow away Civics and BMWs as easily at 20% as I can at 100%.

It does make a difference. For day-to-day driving you should only charge to 80% or 90% capacity and only to a 100% "range charge" right before leaving for a long trip where you know you will need it. It is not healthy for the cells to remain at maximum capacity for long. However you *should* do a range charge every few months to rebalance the cells.

You also *do* lose some performance at low charge levels. There is a reason that people who take their Tesla out for track days want to have a 100% charge before starting - and it's not just because you get a few more laps in. The performance difference isn't much though - you wouldn't notice it without doing a timed run.

[dannyf]

bundled up head to toe just to drive to work because their Leaf's range is derated so badly in the cold that they can't run the cabin heater.

THAT, my friend, is what I would call "travel in comfort and style, Leaf style".

[Corporate666]

Virtual any major technology we have was enabled and energized by fossil fuel. To say that fossil fuel shorten our life while it enabled life expectancy never seen before is ridicules.

The advancements you speak of were enabled by energy - and there are many ways to produce energy.  Fossil fuels are energy dense and cheaper to deploy direct to the consumer than - for example - wind power.  I agree that fossil fuels should not be demonized, but they should be abstracted from the more general term "energy" which we can produce, store and use many different ways.

A lot of game changing technologies only came about because they were subsidized, and things that work at a very large scale often don't work on a small scale.  It goes back to the idea that these are all pet projects and each of us will have different ideas on which are good and which are bad.  But as long as we - as a nation - are sending billions of dollars to countries like Israel, Russia and many in Africa - and considering the potential massive impact that being an EV world leader could have (as well as the massive impact of getting off the teat of foreign oil), I think EV spending is certainly one of the more intelligent uses of public money, especially when it comes in the form of subsidies instead of direct payments like grants and such.

[Corporate666]

But the finance company is holding title to the car, so they own it until such time as you satisfy the amount they paid the manufacturer for the car.

This isn't the US. It isn't analogous. I own the god damned car. It's my property, registered in my name. All the legal documents say "mojo-chan" on them. The DVLA has my name as the registered owner. I am fully liable as the owner under the law.

The finance company has a debt they are owed. They lent me money, not a car. The finance agreement that set up this loan stated that it can only be used to pay for that specific car, and is secured against that car so if I fail to pay it they can get a court order to take ownership of it. They have to go to court because they don't own it, and can't just walk off with other people's property.

They like it that way because if the car gets written off it's my problem. Their loan is still good, it's my property that was trashed. Otherwise if they still owned it I'd just say "too bad, your car is now a small metal cube lol" and leave them to it.

Edit: I was a bit annoyed... Believe me bro, I own it. That's how it works here.

Chill... I am not saying you don't understand finance or trying to support the other guy in his quest to say that, I am more curious about the differences in  how things work there.  I live part time in the USA and part time in the UK.  I haven't run into the scheme you mention in the UK before, but then again, I've never financed a car there.  So if you don't mind me asking, are your payments equal to the totla cost of the car divided by the # of payments, or equal to the difference between the total car price less the buy-out amount  and that amount then divided by the number of payments?

If the former, it seems you would be tying up money unnecessarily compared to a lease (which would be good for the finance company, and bad for you).  If the latter, then it appears to be analogous to a lease in the USA, just with a different name.  Perhaps there are different finance laws that make "leasing by another name" how it's done there.

FWIW, I leased my most recent car.  My name is on the registration, and the insurance, and I have to pay for that insurance as well as the taxes and such.  I also have to maintain the car and if I get in an accident, I have to fix it and if I was at-fault, I could be sued.  The only difference, really, is that at the end of my lease term, I must decide to either keep the car (in which case I must pay the finance company the agreed-upon residual value on the vehicle to get titled ownership), or I can turn it back in to the dealer and walk away.  Or, my third option - if the current market value is in excess of the amount agreed upon for which I may buy the car is to "buy it" and then immediately "sell it" to the dealer.  In practice, this is a paper transaction and merely results in the dealer cutting me a check for a portion of the equity I have in the deal, and they do this because otherwise the car would revert to the finance company who may or may not choose to offer it to the dealer.

[dannyf]

bundled up head to toe just to drive to work because their Leaf's range is derated so badly in the cold that they can't run the cabin heater.

for a reported £32k price tag, WHO would buy such a car?

[mtdoc]

EV car culture has its own quircks. How many miles you can squeeze out of a charge becomes a competittive sport with whole websites devoted to posting ones stats. Some ICE drivers do the same ( but mpg or miles per tank) but it is not a prominent part of the culture. The difference is that ICEs produce a lot of waste heat, so heating your car is free (energy wise).

Since >90% of drivers in the US drive less than 40 miles a day, people who bundle up to avoid turning on the heat in their EV are usually just playing that game and not doing it out of necessity.  Of course if someone has a daily commute that exceeds the distance they can go between charges in their BEV then they are just being dumb. Of course as BEV ranges get progressivlely longer and fast charging stations become more ubiquitous this becomes less of a concern.

[coppice]

Virtual any major technology we have was enabled and energized by fossil fuel.

I suppose you do realise that the industrial revolution was built on water and wind power? Fossil fuels were mostly used for heating and lighting until comparatively recently. The industrial revolution was well underway by the time people like Watt started getting practical motive power from fossil fuels.

Erratic though wind power can be, the early adopters applied it in very practical ways. A grain mill didn't have to run continuously. It just needed to run enough of the time to get all the grain milled. The water pumps, which largely created East Anglia in the UK and the Netherlands, didn't need to run all the time. They just had to pump enough over the months to maintain dry conditions. Wind powered ships were a pain when becalmed, but they were more than adequate to let one tiny country stretch out and turn half the planet into its empire. The problem now is wind is being used in less appropriate ways, where it need to be constantly on, or backed by massive storage, to be valuable.

Water was the power source of choice for factories for hundreds of years, because it can be relied upon. Where there is sufficient elevated water its still the main energy source for electricity production. If the world's population were not so high, it could provide all our needs today.

[Skimask]

Ok, so, you get a car, you're making monthly payments directly related to the car, you lose your job, you quit making monthly payments.
What happens to the car?  Car goes away?  You owned jack in the first place...