Well, just to put this into perspective, we're talking about what here? 15 Leafs in Arizona out of about 500 that have this reported prematurely depleted battery problem?

Meanwhile, Chevy is issuing a factory recall for ALL of the Cruz models from 2011 and 2012 model years for engine fire danger . . .

http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-06-22/news/32372907_1_alan-adler-gm...

And, over at Ford, about 11,000 of the 2013 model Escapes have similar problems.

So, yes, the gasoline powered automobile is a dismal failure. these recalls slipped under the radar screen pretty quickly. I think I heard the Escape one quickly mention on the local TV news, while they were briefing national stories, and the Cruz on while listening to NPR headlines on the radio. If a single Leaf caught fire because of battery issues (I don't think any have,) there would be a media uproar.

Now, taking my tongue of of my cheek for a moment about gasoline cars as a "failure," I will say that Nissan has a duty to examine the warm weather Leaf battery problem thoroughly and come up with a solution. This could involve a battery swap or vehicle buy-back for effected cars in the short term. But, in the long run, they may want to have a more comprehensive battery cooling system in place for Leafs slated to be sold in hot climates. The other week I found an interesting item regarding a paraffin-based battery cooling scenario, which is worth posting a link to again . . .

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=25158

If I'm understanding this thing correctly, the paraffin isn't circulated or pumped between the batteries but, rather, stays between the cells and goes through a phase change during heating and/or cooling cycles.

Regarding next year's Leaf: I'm a bit confused about the decision to tout leather seats in a car that, one would think, is largely marketed to those with ecological concerns. The recycled plastic fabric on this year's model is just fine, though . . .

http://adventuresingreenmarketing.com/tag/nissan-leaf/

I don't need to sit on the carcass of a dead cow while driving around. In fact, I'd rather not. I hope they still offer the non-leather seats for those who feel the same way as I do on this one.

A new heater that is more efficient in colder weather is a more thoughtfully conceived announced upgrade. But it's clear they need to pay attention to that big battery pack for potential customers in the warm climates, who may never turn on the heater in the first place or only use it once or twice a year.

It's probably way too much to ask for, Bill, to see a Leaf have a battery this big and still be marketed anywhere near the current price point. Given lithium ion's current energy density, the size of a 265+ mile battery pack is also going to be next to impossible in a Leaf-sized vehicle, unless you sacrifice the rear seats.

Brad nailed it: the Leaf is funky to look at. Not to stereotype too much, but a lot of Japanese cars - not all, but many - suffer from poor styling cues . . . and it's not just Nissan. All those weird panel folds and funny bumps you just don't see on most European or American cars? We consumers will occasional wince, but we buy anyway, since realistic price points, mechanical reliability and solid engineering eventually trump looks. But, if Nissan could move just a little closer to, say, their 350Z in a Leaf restyle, they'd have a winner . . .

http://cdn.tradebit.org/usr/gearheadred/pub/9002/8982478_NISSAN350ZGOOD.jpg

The same Leaf that I got to have for an "overnight sleepover" last fall is going to be loaned to me again at the end of this month. This time, though, my wife and I will have it for about 2 and a half weeks. We've got 110V in the carport, but I'm sure I'll get to use one of several 220V public and private-retail-owned EVSEs close to me. The owner isn't afraid to drive it to the limit and has taken it, in fact, to every county in Arizona. The car is maintained, but not babied. I plan to give it a less challenging life while I borrow it, using it for short daily around-town commutes and errands . . . exactly what it's designed for.

And I already asked the owner . . . no bars lost on the battery capacity gauge.

I dunno, Steven. Other than the Teslas, which are well beyond the price most can afford, I think the styling of most of the EVs released so far has been a real disappointment. It's not as if a practical form-follows-function car has to be purposely ugly. But a lot of them end up that way. The iPhone/Mac analogy Brad advanced hits home with me. Intelligent function and good aesthetics don't have to be mutually exclusive traits.

Perhaps the current thinking with the OEMs is that a car with a progressive drivetrain has to have an ultra-progressive look. But I think they're trying too hard to make the early EVs stand out from the crowd. Elsewhere on these web pages, people are getting all excited about the new BMW i3 right now, but I think the styling is way too busy . . . like a squared-off and slightly more aggressive version of a neighborhood GEM vehicle.

When the general public start getting comfortable with how EVs work - and I know you understand and appreciate my "exactly what it's designed for" comment - the design departments might start relaxing a little bit and give us an electric cars that - uh - doesn't look too much like one. The batteries will certainly be better by then as well and everything will have fallen into place. We will have arrived.

It's probably related to the early battery failure seen in hot climate. They will sale them at a discount and they will not order other leafs in their dealerships.

I think that the engineers and designers at Nissan need to take this opportunity to both lower the drag and improve the aesthetics of the Leaf. If the drag was low as the Prius or even better the Model S, then I'd guess the range could improve as much as 30-40 miles; which would be huge.

And the looks of the Nismo Leaf racer should give some guidance to revised styling that would have a lot more appeal.

Neil

The problem with 100% electric cars is that they are either to short in range like the Leaf or to expensive like the Model S.
You then have the Volt that is great but has a too sophisticated range extender or a plug-in Prius but it has a to short EV range.

In the end the true successful EV for mass production will be the one with decent EV range (something like 75 miles) and a simple serial range extender that just makes extra electricity in case you want to go further but no clutch or direct wheel drive contact. Just a pure serial system somewhat like the Audi A1 e-tron. It has a same Wankel generator that is compact and light weight.

Remember Exxon isn’t afraid of 100% EV cars that make up 1% of the market but it is of 90% EV cars that make up 100% of the market. They lose 1% of their fuel sales in the first case but 90% in the second.

If Nissan want true market breaktrough they need to add a micro range extender to it.

http://robotpig.net/automotive-news/avl-wankel-range-extender-electric-v...

https://www.avl.com/html/static/emag/Range_Extender/flash.html#/1/

@ Benjamin Nead,

Even with better batteries in the future I can see at least 6 reasons to keep a range extender:

1) Blackouts solution: You can still drive on liquid fuel.
2) Energy source choice: If Electricity is not available or if you happen to be able to tank at a bargain or free.
3) UPS ability: If you are on a wharf, at a second residence with no electricity, or camping in the fields.
4) Battery aging remedial: Your ranger extender will compensate the loss by simply starting earlier.
5) Range extension: The prime objective that allow affordable battery pack while still keeping long range.
6) Cogeneration: In a harsh winter the range extender is an opportunity to provide both heat and electricity.

I suppose I could do a point by point rebuttal to all you have advanced, Priusnaniac, but I'll pick just one.

If, as described in situation #3, I found myself without a house and living out of my car exclusively, I might actually find eaking out a basic existence in an EV even easier than If I had to panhandle with a gas can in hand. If a hobo in a Tesla pulled up to my house and asked to charge overnight on 110V while catching a night's sleep in his Elon Musk motel, I'd probably comply. The indigent Ferrari owner, on the other hand, might only get some pocket change when confronting me in the grocery store parking lot. When I go camping, which isn't all that often anymore, I tend to leave any sort of vehicle far behind and exist off what I can carry on my back.

Actually, here's some justification for challenging scenarios #1 and 2 . . .

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/08/automobiles/08JAPAN.html?pagewanted=all

I'm not totally against range extenders. I just think many who insist they need them probably don't. Americans are known for consuming more than they need. We live in out-sized houses, collect too much in the way of possessions and even eat more than we should. Is it any surprise we have cars that match? I fully admit that I have been more a part of this collective problem through much of my lifetime than part of any solution. No EV here yet, but one on the way when I can afford it. In the mean time, I park the car when possible and walk whenever I can.

Not exactly my all-time favorite politician, George W. Bush, once wisely said "We're addicted to oil." So, I suppose I shouldn't be too harsh on those who insist on range extenders over all-gasoline cars. They're moving in the proper direction. One way off addiction is to gradually decrease the dosage. Some, though, insist on going cold turkey. :-)

@Benjamin Nead : are we sure they won't make the 2013 model till December when the Tenn. plant opens? Wouldn't that mean the rest of the world would have to wait for the 2013 as well?

@Benjamin Nead,

"Gas range extender vehicles (Volt, etc.) will have the advantage over the pure EV until batteries get better, which will probably be just about the same time that current generation of cars with both gasoline and electric motors - which are far more mechanically complex that either a pure gasoline car or an EV - will start needing service. That’s when the mechanically-simpler pure EV will begin to start to outselling the gasoline range extender EV. Give it, say, 5 or 7 years. "

Don't forget the ICE in the Volt has about a 25% duty cycle compared to the average ICE only vehicle. So the engine in the Volt could last a very long time. Also the Volt's ICE only has a single belt to run the mechanical water pump. The belt has no replacement interval because unlike a standard gasoline car the belt doesn't have to deal with the alternator or compressor that varying loads on the belt.

Good points, theflew. But it is possible, you know, to engage the Volt's ICE directly to the drive train, as explained here about a year ago on Plug In Cars . . .

http://www.plugincars.com/chevy-volts-mountain-mode-vastly-underrated-yi...

This alone demonstrates the complexity of the Volt. It's not a "pure" series hybrid, as many think. But even if a driver/owner never uses the Mountain Mode, as described in the above linked article, the range extender ICE still has all the same parts that are going to wear out and maintenance issue found on a vehicle that uses an ICE exclusively. Yes, a range extender should last longer than an ICE that is only going to engage the drive train directly. But you're still going to be feeding it parts and fluids . . . if not tomorrow, then the day after tomorrow. And, let's not forget, a car like the Volt also has a battery system every bit as complex as one found on a pure EV.

Buy what you need. If you regularly make 100+ mile trips, a current generation EV is not for you. But a more complex vehicle is going to have more maintenance issues down the road than a simpler one.