Advice from current i3 owners who owned a Nissan Leaf

[epirali]

After owning both a Leaf and the i3 now for a while I'm finding the i3 to have a much more consistent (and longer) range than the Leaf. The Leaf had a VERY optimistic range display while the i3 seems to be very conservative. Many times I have left work and gone home only to have more range than when I left.

That is interesting, where are you located? Is your driving more city, highway or mix?

I never use the GOM, my observations are based on actual data. Granted it is a little bit harder with i3 because right now there is no accurate SOC %, but I have run the car until REX kicks in and recorded mileage, and also used the measured average miles/KWHr and both show less range.

 

[alohart]

3) The ride is more sporty and the car is much faster, but much more bouncy and less relaxing than the Leaf. This is specially true of the aggressive accelerator/regen, and this is from someone who is used to aggressive regen from Tesla Roadster. I think they missed the mark, this car should not have been tuned to be sport,

The aggressive accelerator can be pacified a bit by choosing Eco Pro or Eco Pro+ modes. BMW would probably not build a car with the handling characteristics of a Leaf regardless of situations in which the Leaf's handling might be preferable to some people.

4) The efficiency (miles/KWHR) is almost identical to Leaf, which is surprising considering all the technology,

The Leaf might have less aerodynamic drag. If so, it might be more efficient at highway speeds although the EPA ratings don't indicate this. Also, the EPA electric range of the REx is 8 miles less than the BEV due to 6% less battery energy being available and the REx being 10% heavier than the BEV, so comparing the efficiency of a BEV to a Leaf would be more apples-to-apples.

Only saving grace is the REX, I honestly could never recommend the BEV i3 over the Leaf.

Some of us don't need a REx and don't want a larger, heavier car like the Leaf. For us, the only EV choices were the Mitsubishi i-MiEV (our first EV) and now the i3 BEV, both of which were similar in size (small), weight, and cargo space, and were both rear-wheel drive which I feel is superior (shorter turning radius, better weigh distribution, better handling). The non-corrosive aluminum and CFRP construction of the i3 is superior for corrosion-prone regions like ours.

And one last nit: who thought the key fob needed a "frunk" opener over the hatch, and why the heck does the hatch not unlock with other doors on stop? That is a constant source of irritation.

If you have a Mega i3 (i.e., no Comfort Access), then this is a valid criticism. But with Comfort Access, merely grabbing the hatch handle with the fob in one's pocket will unlock the hatch, so there's no need for a hatch lock/unlock button on the fob.

 

[epirali]

I do actually drive in Eco most of the time, but I do not like how its tightly coupled with the reduction in AC, specially in the summer, so its an option but not a great one.

As for weight, the only thing about weight that matters is ride dynamics and total range. From my view the i3 does not benefit from either from the weight reduction, so I am not sure why I would care, specially considering the weight is all the way in the bottom for both cars.

I can see the advantage of not having corrosion, but again from my view both of these are short term "lease" cars rather than 6-10 year commitment, the technology and options are changing too fast. That is unless you buy them used or get a great deal from dealers.

As for the packages: I forgot to mention how much I disliked the idea. Homelink should have been standard, and there is no reason to tie something like keyless entry to interior decor. First the Leaf comes standard with keyless entry at $30K, there is no excuse to make keyless entry an option on a car that start $13K higher. And even if it is an option why assume the customer wants a beige or brown leather interior just to get keyless entry? I didn't pick the mega for price, I picked it purposefully to avoid what I considered to be interior colors I was not willing to live with.

I would trade the useless frunk button to the trunk any day. I open the hatch daily, I open the frunk maybe twice a year? I have to tell you from the entire list this would be the reason I would get rid of the i3. I have had it for one week and am starting to think of getting rid of it because of this one small but important oversight. But I am hoping they will fix this in firmware so it unlocks with the doors when you stop.

 

[spinball]

Many times I have left work and gone home only to have more range than when I left.

Now there's something you'll never see in an ICE. :lol:

 

[spinball]

Don't you have a hatch release from inside the car in the footwell on the left side? My wife's Honda Accord does not have any release button/handles on her trunk. It's the footwell trunk release or key fob, same as the i3. I guess if you get rid of the i3 over this issue, don't buy an Accord either!

I agree comfort access should not have been linked to interior colors. I like the Mega and Tera but do not like the Giga at all.

It's a time-honored tradition to complain about BMW options vs other brands standard features. Some things never change.

 

[jelloslug]

That is interesting, where are you located? Is your driving more city, highway or mix?

I never use the GOM, my observations are based on actual data. Granted it is a little bit harder with i3 because right now there is no accurate SOC %, but I have run the car until REX kicks in and recorded mileage, and also used the measured average miles/KWHr and both show less range.

That's the difference right there. I have a BEV which gets easily 10 to 15% more battery range. I just ran an errand last night and right now the app is showing 41% charge status and 59 miles since last charge. My driving is more city.

 

[jadnashuanh]

That result just shows that the i3 was optimized for city driving, with maybe a section of highway to get into the city. I don't remember ever seeing a Cd for the i3, but I'd guess that it's actually pretty good in comparison to many others with the smooth bottom, the wheel designs, and the narrower tires all playing into it. No openings in the front to create pressure or turbulence. With any vehicle, the drag increase with speed is NOT linear, it's hyperbolic; IOW, you're using more and more of your energy to overcome drag as you go faster. If you could operate in a vacuum, it wouldn't matter once you'd attained your cruising speed.

 

[epirali]

That result just shows that the i3 was optimized for city driving, with maybe a section of highway to get into the city. I don't remember ever seeing a Cd for the i3, but I'd guess that it's actually pretty good in comparison to many others with the smooth bottom, the wheel designs, and the narrower tires all playing into it. No openings in the front to create pressure or turbulence. With any vehicle, the drag increase with speed is NOT linear, it's hyperbolic; IOW, you're using more and more of your energy to overcome drag as you go faster. If you could operate in a vacuum, it wouldn't matter once you'd attained your cruising speed.

Some of this is true, and yet it is still puzzling. By numbers the i3 is BETTER than the Leaf by every metric (.29 vs 0.32 drag, 3,064 pound to 3,340 ), yet the Leaf gets better efficiency in both city and highway.

So I don't think saying it is optimized for city driving explains it, I can get around 100-105 miles if I truly do city only driving in the Leaf (<40 mph, stop and go).

 

[I33t]

the drag increase with speed is NOT linear, it's hyperbolic;

Hyperbolic??

The drag increases at the cube of the speed:

Power needs are the cube of the velocity, so if it takes 10 horsepower to go 80 kph it will take 80 horsepower to go 160 kph.

http://www.universetoday.com/73315/what-is-air-resistance/

 

[I33t]

That result just shows that the i3 was optimized for city driving, with maybe a section of highway to get into the city. I don't remember ever seeing a Cd for the i3, but I'd guess that it's actually pretty good in comparison to many others with the smooth bottom, the wheel designs, and the narrower tires all playing into it. No openings in the front to create pressure or turbulence. With any vehicle, the drag increase with speed is NOT linear, it's hyperbolic; IOW, you're using more and more of your energy to overcome drag as you go faster. If you could operate in a vacuum, it wouldn't matter once you'd attained your cruising speed.

Some of this is true, and yet it is still puzzling. By numbers the i3 is BETTER than the Leaf by every metric (.29 vs 0.32 drag, 3,064 pound to 3,340 ), yet the Leaf gets better efficiency in both city and highway.

So I don't think saying it is optimized for city driving explains it, I can get around 100-105 miles if I truly do city only driving in the Leaf (<40 mph, stop and go).

The i3 is, and always has been more efficient than the Leaf, BEV or REX:

As previously pointed out, you cannot claim that the Leaf is more efficient than the i3 just because you have a REX i3. Whatever your personal mileage experience is, does not change the inherent efficiency of the i3. It is the hands down most efficient EV of any size on the market, and has been since it was released.

 

[epirali]

That result just shows that the i3 was optimized for city driving, with maybe a section of highway to get into the city. I don't remember ever seeing a Cd for the i3, but I'd guess that it's actually pretty good in comparison to many others with the smooth bottom, the wheel designs, and the narrower tires all playing into it. No openings in the front to create pressure or turbulence. With any vehicle, the drag increase with speed is NOT linear, it's hyperbolic; IOW, you're using more and more of your energy to overcome drag as you go faster. If you could operate in a vacuum, it wouldn't matter once you'd attained your cruising speed.

Some of this is true, and yet it is still puzzling. By numbers the i3 is BETTER than the Leaf by every metric (.29 vs 0.32 drag, 3,064 pound to 3,340 ), yet the Leaf gets better efficiency in both city and highway.

So I don't think saying it is optimized for city driving explains it, I can get around 100-105 miles if I truly do city only driving in the Leaf (<40 mph, stop and go).

The i3 is, and always has been more efficient than the Leaf:

As previously pointed out, you cannot claim that the Leaf is more efficient than the i3 just because you have a REX i3. Lets stick to fair comparisons.

Whatever your personal mileage experience is, does not change the inherent efficiency of the i3. It is the hands down most efficient EV of any size on the market, and has been since it was released.

First: I never said I was comparing the BEV to BEV, I clearly stated that I got the i3/Rex for range extension and found out that it doesn't pay off as much as one would think.

Second: I DO NOT care about ratings. I am an engineer and a very good one (and modest to boot!). I am very good at testing complex systems, understand aerodynamics, control systems, battery systems, driving styles. I am a pilot so I understand density altitude effects, etc. I say all this to say: I DO NOT CARE what the ratings are. In real world comparable tests the i3 w/REX achieves the same efficiency as the Leaf. And with a smaller battery is has less electric only range. The BEV would probably achieve SLIGHTLY better efficiency due to reduced weight, but 0.2 * 19 KWHr is only an additional 4 miles of range. To be completely fair I would love to test a BEV only i3 and see how much more efficient it is.

This is useful information for anyone considering jumping from the Leaf to the i3/Rex. The "rating" numbers are not.

 

[epirali]

Can anyone pull up the efficiency rating comparison between an i3 BEV an i3/REX? I can't seem to find any exact information.

Thanks.

 

[I33t]

Can anyone pull up the efficiency rating comparison between an i3 BEV an i3/REX? I can't seem to find any exact information.

Thanks.

It's in the pasted graphics I posted.

If you are an engineer, you would recognise that the REX is slightly more efficient than the Leaf. It does have a smaller battery but it is still more efficient.

I DO NOT care about ratings. I am an engineer and a very good one

I'd have to question that statement. A bunch of engineers at the EPA test the vehicles on a standard (not your driving style) and deliver a result you clearly don't like. That's not the sort of engineer I hire, and I do hire them.

 

[epirali]

Can anyone pull up the efficiency rating comparison between an i3 BEV an i3/REX? I can't seem to find any exact information.

Thanks.

It's in the pasted graphics I posted.

If you are an engineer, you would recognise that the REX is slightly more efficient than the Leaf. It does have a smaller battery but it is still more efficient.

I DO NOT care about ratings. I am an engineer and a very good one

I'd have to question that statement. A bunch of engineers at the EPA test the vehicles on a standard (not your driving style) and deliver a result you clearly don't like. That's not the sort of engineer I hire, and I do hire them.

Then you should know that a system can be designed SPECIFICALLY to meet test requirements but not real world performance. For example the i8 is range tested to 20 miles all electric but it takes a LOT to break 15. In fact I believe the i8 had to be revised downward from its stared range.

This issue has been around in both ICE and BEV vehicles. Some perform about the same as standard test results in real life, while others tend to not really live up to testing.

Anyway you seem to respond to this topic emotionally. I am confident enough of my understanding that I don't. I currently own 4 electric cars from three companies and have been studying various performance aspects for a few years now.

Can you tell me please what is the expected reported performance difference between the two versions from the graph? On the exact same amount of capacity how many more miles do you expect?

 

[I33t]

Can you tell me please what is the expected reported performance difference between the two versions from the graph? On the exact same amount of capacity how many more miles do you expect?

I'm sorry, what graph?

Expected performance difference depends on driving style. Also be aware that the REX is heavier so driving it at the same acceleration levels as the BEV will impact range even more.

Correcting your posts does not require emotion, it requires clear thinking.

Regarding the i8, it appears to have been rated the same for 2014 and 2015:

 

[alohart]

Can you tell me please what is the expected reported performance difference between the two versions from the graph? On the exact same amount of capacity how many more miles do you expect?

The posted chart shows the relative wall-to-wheel efficiencies of various i3's and Leafs, but it doesn't include a full comparison including the rated ranges. The posted chart allows one to compare the electricity consumed by the various i3's and Leafs on the EPA's combined city-highway cycle. That's one kind of performance that includes the efficiency of the charging circuit in addition to that of the drive train and aerodynamics but doesn't provide the answer to your second question.

EPA combined range / usable battery pack capacity would compute how many miles an i3 BEV and REx would drive per unit of battery pack capacity. Because the REx cannot use the bottom 6% of its battery pack's capacity, its usable battery pack capacity is 94% of the BEV's.

BEV: 81 mi / 18.8 kWh = 4.3 mi/kWh

REx: 72 mi / (18.8 * 0.94) kWh = 4.1 mi/kWh

The difference in efficiencies is due to the 10% greater weight of the REx vs. the BEV as well as the slightly lower drag coefficient of the BEV (0.29) vs. the REx (0.30) (maybe the REx has a cooling air intake for its REx engine that increases its drag coefficient). For the usable battery capacity of the REx, the BEV could drive (18.8 * 0.94) kWh * 4.3 mi/kWh = 76 miles, or 4 miles farther than the REx.

 

[epirali]

Can you tell me please what is the expected reported performance difference between the two versions from the graph? On the exact same amount of capacity how many more miles do you expect?

The posted chart shows the relative wall-to-wheel efficiencies of various i3's and Leafs, but it doesn't include a full comparison including the rated ranges. The posted chart allows one to compare the electricity consumed by the various i3's and Leafs on the EPA's combined city-highway cycle. That's one kind of performance that includes the efficiency of the charging circuit in addition to that of the drive train and aerodynamics but doesn't provide the answer to your second question.

EPA combined range / usable battery pack capacity would compute how many miles an i3 BEV and REx would drive per unit of battery pack capacity. Because the REx cannot use the bottom 6% of its battery pack's capacity, its usable battery pack capacity is 94% of the BEV's.

BEV: 81 mi / 18.8 kWh = 4.3 mi/kWh

REx: 72 mi / (18.8 * 0.94) kWh = 4.1 mi/kWh

The difference in efficiencies is due to the 10% greater weight of the REx vs. the BEV as well as the slightly lower drag coefficient of the BEV (0.29) vs. the REx (0.30) (maybe the REx has a cooling air intake for its REx engine that increases its drag coefficient). For the usable battery capacity of the REx, the BEV could drive (18.8 * 0.94) kWh * 4.3 mi/kWh = 76 miles, or 4 miles farther than the REx.

Thanks. Which matches my guess, a gain of .2 miles/KWHr gain from nit having Rex. So even if Account for the .2 miles/KWHr improvement I'd only be getting the same efficiency as the Leaf for the BEV, or at best .1 miles/KWHr better, gaining 1.9 miles range. The i3 woukd still be around 10 miles less real life range than a Leaf.

What would be interesting is the see how much the active BMS helps the i3 range in winter.

 

[epirali]

Correcting your posts does not require emotion, it requires clear thinking.

Regarding the i8, it appears to have been rated the same for 2014 and 2015:

I was referring to stated vs revised numbers before the i8 was released.

I am very clear on my logic. I am not discussing flat test loop efficiency, as I do not live on a test track. These numbers are a good starting point for comparison, but not the end of the story. For all its technology the i3 BEV is not really delivering the same range as a Leaf. Accounting for smaller battery it makes up a little for it by slightly better efficiency but falls short. So the trade off of a smaller battery DID NOT gain or match range. If it had then i3 would be a lighter car with same range.

My current observations are in moderate temperatures (70-85 F), on elevation changes of under 300 feet, and in mixed speeds of driving ranging from 35 to 65. I have plotted this same course with elevation changes and consumption for the Leaf using available tools. Only thing I can not do exactly with i3 is a SOC percentage.

There is a very large community of leaf drivers who have studied it's behavior as engineers and understand its strength and weaknesses. I have yet to see that kind of rigor applied to the i3.

 

[alohart]

So even if Account for the .2 miles/KWHr improvement I'd only be getting the same efficiency as the Leaf for the BEV, or at best .1 miles/KWHr better, gaining 1.9 miles range. The i3 woukd still be around 10 miles less real life range than a Leaf.

Everyone's real life situation differs. Apparently yours is more ideal for a Leaf than for an i3 since an i3 is inherently more efficient than a Leaf under test conditions. I can't compare my real life situation with my i3 BEV to that of a Leaf, but my lifetime battery pack-to-wheel efficiency average is 5.6 mi/kWh, or 105 miles range if I used all 18.8 kWh. I might do as well with a Leaf due to its greater usable battery pack capacity, but its greater weight would be a disadvantage in my typical stop-and-go traffic and hilly terrain.

 

[epirali]

So even if Account for the .2 miles/KWHr improvement I'd only be getting the same efficiency as the Leaf for the BEV, or at best .1 miles/KWHr better, gaining 1.9 miles range. The i3 woukd still be around 10 miles less real life range than a Leaf.

Everyone's real life situation differs. Apparently yours is more ideal for a Leaf than for an i3 since an i3 is inherently more efficient than a Leaf under test conditions. I can't compare my real life situation with my i3 BEV to that of a Leaf, but my lifetime battery pack-to-wheel efficiency average is 5.6 mi/kWh, or 105 miles range if I used all 18.8 kWh. I might do as well with a Leaf due to its greater usable battery pack capacity, but its greater weight would be a disadvantage in my typical stop-and-go traffic and hilly terrain.

I think the stop and go wouldn't matter as much, but you are probably dead on about a more dramatic climb/elevation and weight. The Leaf would definitely have a disadvantage.

My fundamental surprise has been that efficiency gain is so small considering the amount of engineering and technology put into the car. I would have expected more.

Another suspect is the more aggressive regen. It is too aggressive in my opinion. Regen is a great way to stop obviously, but is at best maybe 40-45% efficient in recapture. It may be too hard to modulate the amount of regen needed in the i3 to minimize it. I have even noticed that with adaptive cruise control the car uses regen more aggressively than I would expect. I like having a lot of regen but they should have either changed the response curve of the throttle or offered a couple of modes based on driving terrain like the Leaf.