Nissan's 2010 electric car in U.S. will be price-competitive with Camry, batteries included
If you happen to be in San Diego this afternoon you may get a chance to view what Nissan 's director of product planning and strategy, Mark Perry, is calling "a true market introduction" of the electric car that the company will offer for sale in America next year. It won't actually look like the coming 5-seater, but under the Nissan Cube skin is said to lay the same drivetrain as the 2010 model. While speaking about the upcoming event, Perry let slip that the pricing of the vehicle will be competitive with the Honda Civic, Toyota Camry and Nissan Altima. "We're not going to be charging a premium for this car, batteries included," he said in a statement that seemed to rule out the battery leasing model.
The appearance at the Broadway Pier in downtown San Diego is meant to introduce the vehicle to fleet managers from universities, municipalities and private companies. Nissan has partnered with San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E), who will help install charging infrastructure, to bring its electrics to the area. The utility has plans to acquire between 15 and 20 of the EVs for their own fleet. No clue was given as to the unveiling date of the actual vehicle and price though we do expect the car with its 100-mile range to be available sometime next July. We'll have more details later today.
[Source: Sign On San Diego]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
why not the LS2LS7? 12:46PM (3/23/2009)
Well, yeah. If you make the car small enough and the range a joke, you don't need to put in a big battery, which keeps costs down.
Reply
polo 1:30PM (3/23/2009)
100mile range is a joke? They haven't even unveiled the the car yet so how do you know what size it will be?
Just stick to SUVs. The rest of us will do just fine with one of these.
darius 1:53PM (3/23/2009)
Well with GM's study of 78% of commuters drive less than 40 miles per day. One could recharge every other day and still be fine. If your average commute is under 20 miles / day which is true for quite a few people, you are looking at 5 days per charge.
Other things I like about the 100 mile range choice is the cost of the battery/car drastically reduced as well as the charging time / power needed.
If they could design the car to allow relatively easy upgrades in lets say 50 mile modules and to go up to maybe 200 mile range. Then with time if the module external design / interface allows perhaps options to upgrade to batter batteries with time. This would be a winner in my view.
why not the LS2LS7? 5:58PM (3/23/2009)
How do I know what size it is? I'm going by the picture. It's a Cube.
The problem with 100 mile range is the same thing that Ed Begley, Jr. said in "Who Killed the Electric Car?" He says "the electric car can ONLY satisfy 95% of the driving public". He says it facetiously. But it's real.
If this car is good enough 95% of the time, that means it isn't good enough 5% of the time. That is more than once a month. No one is going to buy a car that lets them down more than once a month.
100 mile range is basically an NEV. I don't have a problem with NEVs, but to find that someone says they can make an NEV for the same price as a Camry is not anything special. What would be amazing is to find a real, practical electric car for the same price as a Camry.
Pudge 1:34PM (3/23/2009)
Not to be too cynical, but I'm guessing that the Camry-price range is AFTER the federal tax credit of $7,500.
Reply
RAN 1:45PM (3/23/2009)
I don't know why every potential maker of serial hybrids and EVs wants to limit buyer choices. Some want to force battery leases down everyone's throats, some don't want to offer it at all. Why make a customer choose? Serial hybrids and EVs should be available with a variety of ranges to fit individual needs. Personally, I want to own the batteries, but if others would rather lease, we should both be able to get what we want.
Plus, I can't help but wonder why Fisker, for example, really needs to use a turbocharged 2.0 liter 4-cyl engine to drive the generator. Couldn't an engine half the size with half the power do the job? Does the Fisker really need to be able to cruise at 120 mph? If they used a smaller ICE, wouldn't that allow room for a customer to get enough extra batteries for a 60 mile EV range? Or 80, if they needed it?
I don't think any of these manufacturers can afford to turn off potential early adopters when they don't have to.
Reply
paulwesterberg 6:05PM (3/23/2009)
1. I agree that I would rather own than lease. I think they will allow leasing, but people will probably lease the entire car rather than just the battery pack.
2. Fisker isn't trying to produce an efficient electric car they are trying to produce a "sports" car and make good money off of it. The electric motor will give them good torque and the turbo 4cyl will give them good peak power.
They are competing against the tesla roadster. If there were competing against the toyota prius then a 2cyl 1L engine would suffice. I would rather buy an entirely electric car myself.
paulwesterberg 6:09PM (3/23/2009)
This car seems like it will have a decent range and a reasonable cost, but I hope the test car in the picture is just a mule and that the production model will be far more areodynamic.
Charlie 3:38PM (3/23/2009)
If the car actually got 100 miles range that would be one thing, but advertising 100 miles doesn't make me optimistic. What's the range traveling at real world highway speeds with the headlights, the stereo and either heating or AC on?
Reply
jake 2:41PM (3/23/2009)
It's probably going to be EPA range. No manufacturer advertises with the "real world range". Even in gas cars they don't give the real world numbers. But from previous tests of other EVs like the iMIEV, it seems 100 miles advertised range will translate to about 80 with everything on (AC takes the most energy). But then the iMIEV posts range numbers by the Japanese cycle. If the 100 miles claimed by Nissan is the new EPA cycle (which factors in the AC part better) then it should be better, maybe like 90.
charlie 3:41PM (3/23/2009)
@jake:
If 100 miles is on the EPA cycle then I highly doubt we'd be seeing 90 miles in real life. The EPA cycle is done at an average speed of ~50 mph, on a dynometer (no wind resistance!), with no AC, stereo, or anything else like that.
Also, what about after the battery is 1-2 years old and can only hold 80% of the charge as when it was brand new?
For these reasons I think that we need electric cars that have 200 to 300 mile EPA estimated ranges. With those, in adverse conditions with a slightly worn battery you're still talking about getting over 100 miles of range in the real world.
Herm 4:59PM (3/23/2009)
As long as you get 40 miles under the worst conditions then 80% of the public will benefit from it.. if you drive more than that then perhaps its not the car for you.
A big red lamp should light up when you get down to 55% capacity, that should allow you to turn around and reach home. The power used can be easily measured, the total capacity can be estimated from when it is recharged.
why not the LS2LS7? 6:01PM (3/23/2009)
If it's anything like other electric cars, the 100 mile range is at 35-40mph tops, and if you cruise for extended periods at 45-55mph you get maybe 60 miles range. Take it on the expressway and you're looking at 40 miles or less range.
Give me real-world figures that show this car is practical at the same speeds as a cheap gas car and I'll be more excited. Until then, it's another G-Whiz or Th!nk City.
jake 7:40PM (3/23/2009)
@charlie
The new EPA cycle goes to up to 80mph while previously it only went up to 60mph and
also this stuff is added:
"Things like very hot and very cold temperatures and driving with the air-conditioner and defroster on are now part of the testing regimen. Acceleration rates in the old tests were funeral-procession sedate, owing to the limits of the dynos used when the tests were originally conceived in the '70s. More spirited, but realistic, acceleration and braking rates are now specified."
http://www.edmunds.com/advice/fueleconomy/articles/119812/article.html
This is why the hybrids took the biggest hit in mpg ratings for 2008.
@why not the LS2LS7?
It'll make a difference depending on if this number is the most ideal number or if it's EPA, though I'm not sure if it's as dramatic as 40% of ideal for highway speeds. I imagine being a major manufacturer they will aim to have 100 miles EPA not just 100 miles ideal even if it means the car is more expensive. I imagine the car is likely to end up only in the $30k range with the $7500 credit applied (so basically like the Volt but with more batteries, no gas engine, and using a wider SOC range). If they have a joint battery venture they might get the batteries a little cheaper to help the price, but it'll likely be around the same (I think they have one with NEC).
RAN 3:19PM (3/23/2009)
It seems to me that "real world range" is a little more critical in an EV than it is in a gas burner. Maybe it's time to adopt it early on and relegate all the other BS estimates to a bygone era.
Reply
EV1 1:48PM (3/24/2009)
why not the LS2LS7?
Ed Begley was talking about 95% of people can use an EV because they went 100 miles in 1996. Just like SUVs and minivans and sports cars only meet a percentage of people's needs, the EV is the same. So he was pointing out the hypocrisy that one vehicle has to fulfill all the needs of all the cars. I believe you've misinterpreted his message.
Reply