2013 Nissan Leaf Review | Hacker News Reader

2013 Nissan Leaf Review

nydailynews.com

43 pointscodex48 comments

Having used a Leaf twice for 2 full weekends in the North East of England I can say that I think it's a great car. It feels like driving the future of affordable family vehicles. In the short term it is only as a run around / second family car for weekday commuting and running to the shops. At UK electric prices the cost per mile is not quite as low as you would like, can't remember exactly what I worked it out to be but is was about 30% of the cost of a petrol mile - don't hold me to that though I can't quite remember.

The short range is a pain and the first weekend we used it we had 5 inches of snow and it was -5 so not ideal with the climate control on.

I have a close connection to someone who works at the Nissan plant where they are ramping up the production (Sunderland) and my understanding is that Nissan see this as a long term investment to be improved year on year to be a main stream alternative.

MPG for electric cars - all explained here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miles_per_gallon_gasoline_equiv.... Basically you convert everything to equivalent energy to do the comparison.

I leased a Nissan Leaf a couple of weeks ago as a commuter vehicle. I only did it because of the price, which was amazingly low, combined with the benefits of no gas, carpool lane access, and no emissions. What has surprised me is how much I like it as a car. It's rather cheap and cheerful materials, but it's thoughtfully designed, and drives great. Given the Federal rebate in the US, and the extra ones you get in California and other states, I highly recommend it. (particularly somewhere like the Bay Area, where there are charging stations everywhere)

That page is pretty funny:

"... research showed that participants did not understand the concept of a kilowatt hour as a measure of electric energy use despite the use of this unit in their monthly electric bills. Instead, participants favored a miles per gallon equivalent, MPGe, as the metric to compare with the familiar miles per gallon used for gasoline vehicles. The research also concluded that the kW-hrs per 100 miles metric was more confusing to focus group participants compared to a miles per kW-hr."

The fact that people find inverse consumption less confusing than consumption seems to indicate the they never actually do any calculations based on that number...

The problem with MPGe is that, while it makes for a nice number to compare to ICE vehicles, it entangles things like the average national efficiency of power plants with the energy consumption of the car, so it's impossible to calculate e.g. how much it will cost me to drive to work every day or how large a PV setup I need to supply my commuting energy need.

Oh yes, the classic "people won't understand that so let's go with the bad solution".

It would be nice to normalize everything to "price per mile". Shouldn't be too hard to come up with reasonable numbers for each state.

Would would a Leaf get access to the carpool lane while not carpooling?

California lets an unlimited number of electric vehicles get HOV stickers to allow access at all times.

Not in WA.

Not yet, but there is a bill pending in the legislature.

After the third paragraph sits this comparison with the Tesla Model S. http://autos.nydailynews.com/compare/1525-1606-1613-3976/201...

The word 'disingenuous' comes to mind, as you can see they've deliberately started off with a Tesla Model S column containing nothing but red "x" marks suggesting it lacks every feature of every other car. Looks like a disguised smear campaign to me.

Wow, it is also wrong - the tesla does have many of those features.

They're comparing the $50K model, which is the most spartan Model S.

Right, and no "Driver and Passenger Seat Airbags?" Come on...

And now compared against the Signature Performance. http://autos.nydailynews.com/compare/1528-1606-1613-3976/201...

Agreed; they have bullshit specs for the S.

Well, you can say this either way. It also packs 362 hp, which makes the other cars look like matchboxes in comparison.

Where I agree with you, though, is that it is crystal clear that they don't target the same customers, and in this regard, the comparison is indeed disingenuous, one way or the other. If it were traditional gasoline cars, you'd never see this (say, a Mustang alongside the Yaris, because, you know, they both use gasoline!).

This reads a lot like a mildly massaged press release.

I thought exactly the same thing as I read this.

time to shove it into that text fluff analyser website that was linked a while ago, wish I'd remember its name.

http://www.blablameter.com ?

Your text: 3078 characters, 539 words Bullshit Index :0.24 Your text shows some indications of 'bullshit'-English, but is still within an acceptable range.

That's good to know.

there is also churnalism, a chrome extension that checks if a story is just a press release or plagiarized - this story checks out

https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/churnalism/igpjomm...

The stat sheet they have posted there has a lot of misinformation or misleading information/omissions...

Proof?

The stat sheet (http://autos.nydailynews.com/compare/1525-1606-1613-3976/201...) suggests that the Tesla S has none of the features of the other cars (including some obviously false claims like that it has no driver and passenger seat airbags). All of Tesla's features can be found here http://www.teslamotors.com/models/features Almost every one of those red 'x's placed in the Tesla column is a bold faced lie.

The stat sheet states outright that Tesla has no backup assist, video display, usb audio connections, bluetooth, climate control, navigation, on and on, and every single one of those is included as a feature on this section of the Tesla page: http://www.teslamotors.com/models/features#/interior

I'm not sure it's a lie, per se: they're comparing to the $50K model which doesn't exist anymore. But even the current low end model at $67K doesn't include navigation.

EDIT: No, looking further at their database, they have no data at all for Tesla, and everything is pretty much wrong. Total fail.

I leased a Leaf about 3 days ago (24 not 36 months so I'm out of the $2,500 state rebate but I'd rather turn the car in, in 2 years and get another). Waiting at a Toyota charging station in Oakland, CA right now while the wife is getting a pedi. The Assistant Service Manager started to give me a hard time saying they only charge Toyota EV's, but his manager changed his mind. So far, so awesome. It's actually kind of exciting driving past gas stations.

My previous car was a sports cars (cayman) that I drove constantly over 80 MPH as a norm, and filled with 91 octane. (apx $4.15/gallon) The tires, the 60K service, brakes, etc. I just got tired of the expense and the looming expenses of owning a car like that. The Leaf is certainly a personal life change but I actually feel a bit relieved. I find myself chauffeuring my wife around more, which to be honest is kind of cool too. She feels it's too "technical" for her to feel comfortable driving, but that's just because she hasn't driven it yet.

The sports car thing must be a phase. I can't wait for the day I walk in to a dealer and drive out with an Audi R8 Spyder. And I am very non-luxurious with the rest of my expenses.

You'll grow out of it. It's really easy to grow out of $2k (slightly less) for tires. My advice is to stay clear of this sort of thing because you may fall in love.

We got rid of a late-model Jaguar S-Type to make room for the Leaf. I'm glad we did. Cheaper to run, and just as much fun in different ways. The Leaf isn't as nicely appointed, but we've learned to live without a walnut dashboard.

Why a leaf rather than a Tesla model S, which seems more Jaguar- equivalent?

I personally liked the Leaf over the Tesla because of the price tag and availability. The dealer has tons of Leafs. The Tesla has a waiting list. In 2 years, I'll turn my Leaf in for a newer model that hopefully has more range and charges more quickly. I don't even want to think about the resell value of the 2013 EV in 2015 IF the range doubles and charging times get cut in half.

At the time of purchase the Model S didn't exist. When pre-orders were being accepted I looked into putting a deposit down, but the signature editions were already sold out. Didn't feel like waiting for a lower-end model (higher-priced ones being built first), as we'd already been through the waiting game with the Leaf (I pre-ordered one on the first day Nissan took orders).

No matter, we like our Leaf and that gives us some time to see what else Tesla comes up with.

Four seats, soft top convertible, for forty thousand or less, and then I will join the electric crowd. Currently we have this quirky little Nissan, the all too small 500e, and the big as a boat Tesla.

Give us something fun and environmentally friendly, thank you.

Given the drag that a convertible imposes, you're probably waiting a long time for that.

Are you sure the 500e is too small? None of the dealers I've called have one yet.

Don't forget the Honda Fit EV and Rav4 EV. The Rav4 is effectively a cheap tesla. But. Neither model is priced to compete like the leaf and 500e are.

It would be awesome if the linked comparison chart wasn't full of errors (the Tesla apparently has NO features), included ranges (even best guesses) for each of the vehicles and mentioned whether the stated range of the Tesla was for the base price model.

I've never understood 1 thing about the car industry – why are 90% of cars so boring- or even ugly-looking? Why don't the manufacturers make designs like the Tesla S?

Have you ever seen an Aston Martin, a ferrari, a lambo or a rolls royce? They all look fantastic. If you can charge 80k+ for a car you can invest time in making it look good.

The Leaf is 1/3 rd the price of the Model S.

That's what I don't understand. Does good design really add substantial cost to the car?

Luxury cars can start from the ground up. In the case of the Leaf, the first line is "start with a Nissan Versa..." Plus there are all kinds of trade-offs between aerodynamics, noise reduction, aesthetics, and cost.

Me, I'm fine with the looks of the Leaf. But we also own the original Scion xB.

I actually like the look. It's quirky like the Prius, while the S is a little more showy and looks expensive.

It is difficult to make small cars look interestingly designed with out being busy or cartoonish. It's one of the reasons fashion models are so tall.

In addition small cars have less room for aesthetics before they start intruding on function: cargo space, door dimensions, passenger space, ergonomics, etc.

Other constraints as mikestew points out: parts have to be useable between multiple cars, small engines and a desire for efficiency mean less wiggle room for ignoring aerodynamics

Hmm I just read an article in Japanese regarding Nissan's struggles with the Leaf, so I'm not sure which story to believe.

Based on what I saw in Revenge of the Electric Car, I think they expected much more out of the Leaf than they've gotten so far. I think they were also aiming for 100 miles of range, though, and fell short of it by a significant margin...

Citation?

Here's a nice chewy review: http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/02/review-a-week-in-a-... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5730002

50,000 cars sold globally makes it the best selling electric car? I thought that number was very low and then I googled some stats - it seems that the mini cooper for example sells ~100,000 cars per year. Somehow I'd have expected for cars to sell like a million units to make their whole manufacturing profitable.

Sadly, yes, the Leaf is selling like dog shit sandwiches. The Chevy Volt is doing a little better, apparently. I don't know if it's those weekly trips from SFO to LA that people raise as an objection to EVs, or because a gasoline car is the safe bet. After almost two years of ownership, I can't imagine why anyone with the means wouldn't buy an EV as at least a second car.

Why the moderators not only changed the title, but changed to one that is NOT the article title?

Usually they do the opposite (and ruins a perfectly good title), not they did something consistant (ruined a title) while not following the guidelines they claim to follow (of renaming to follow the article title)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com