• expired

Nissan Leaf Drive Away: Leaf 39kWh (270km Range) $39,990, Leaf e+ 59kWh (385km Range) $49,990 @ Nissan

11210
Nissan Leaf Drive Away: Leaf 39kWh (270km Range) $39,990, Leaf e+ 59kWh (385km Range) $49,990 @ Nissan
Go to Deal
navman on 09/05/2024 - 08:05 nissan.com.au (6307 clicks)
Last edited 09/05/2024 - 10:43 by 2 other users

For those who missed out on the Peugeot e-2008 deal, this provides a good alternative for a Japanese built EV. Range is low on the base model, only 270km. It also has CHAdeMO port for DC fast charging, so it may be harder to find a compatible fast charger on the road. However, if you charge at home, it uses a standard type 2 plug for AC charging. Additionally, battery does not have active thermal management, so range may drop off further in several years. I would do thorough research before committing, but seems like a good deal given the usual price is $50k+.

Automotive Car Electric Vehicle Nissan

Related Stores

Nissan Australia
Nissan Australia

Comments

              • vaper on 10/05/2024 - 08:03

                @Jamesx: A 2007 Corolla is worth about $7,500-$10,000. One of the best Toyota's ever made.

                • Igaf on 11/05/2024 - 12:35

                  @vaper: Not even close, esp since on a vehicle of that age insurance companies will only give you market value and you will lose rego etc into the bargain. Even a Levin will be maxed out at ~$6.5K. Virtually any semi-major accident will be treated as a write-off.

      • kungfuman on 09/05/2024 - 09:28
        +1

        I only pay 119 a month (1428 a year) for my 2023 tesla model 3 had it 14 months now. That full comprehensive including 6 month car rental and choice of repairer. as well as windshield replacement included for my insurance.

        • Bab on 09/05/2024 - 11:14
          +1

          6 months rental! Insurance name please.

          • kungfuman on 09/05/2024 - 11:16
            +1

            @Bab: Allianz in Queensland, with all my discounts applied.

            no idea what you get down south.
            I do find it funny that some negged a good deal lol.

      • Sleepycat3 on 09/05/2024 - 09:41
        +5

        You're comparing a 17 year old car to a 1 year old car. The value insured would be very different at $4000 vs $45000 Your premium of $1300 is within the ball park. When I bought my 2014 Mazda6, insurance for it was also $1350 with the cheapest mainstream insurer. The car was worth $48000.

        • Nugs on 09/05/2024 - 11:07
          +1

          "You're comparing a 17 year old car to a 1 year old car."
          doesn't matter if they write off a Bugatti Chiron in the process
          .

        • hotphil on 09/05/2024 - 12:45

          It's not your vehicle they're insuring. It's your risk of smacking into a row of Bentleys

        • billdsl on 10/05/2024 - 07:59

          My car keeps reducing in value and the premium increases at a higher rate. Dont think value is a huge item now

      • Captain Hindsight on 09/05/2024 - 09:53
        +3

        $1300 sadly is a bargain for me.

        I have a Tesla model Y I paid last year $1800 with NRMA. Did a quote with budget direct just to see how things have progressed $3,5k another $4,300 - lowest risk, only caveat is mixed business and personal.

        Don't get me wrong car is great but EV fanatics who think petrol savings are saving them money are only looking at part of the story.

        • klaw81 on 09/05/2024 - 10:32

          When I was pricing various options for replacing my car last year, the annual premium for comprehensive insurance on a 2022 Tesla Model 3 and a 2022 hybrid Camry were only $150 apart, despite the agreed value of the Telsa being $10k higher.

          Budget Direct are well known as having very high premiums for EVs - Allianz gave me a premium that was less than half of BD.

      • panos on 10/05/2024 - 14:38

        No way your coooroloa is 230 a year comp……not 2024 now impossible

    • spicygastropod on 09/05/2024 - 08:48
      +3

      Comprehensive insurance for my grey-import Gen 2 Leaf is $1,200/year, about the same as my Subaru. And with a 5-year unlimited km warranty repair costs will be zero for those five years.

      • goodwillN1 on 09/05/2024 - 09:04

        I tried to run a quote for a new Tesla Model 3. Budget Direct quoted me 5k/year for comprehensive…

        • spicygastropod on 09/05/2024 - 09:17
          +2

          Great, don’t buy a Tesla?

        • May4th on 09/05/2024 - 09:21
          +4

          Some insurers don't want to cover ev and price accordingly, BD is one of them. much cheaper alternatives if you shop around

        • MrMcHairyHead on 09/05/2024 - 15:26

          Budget has insane Tesla pricing for some reason. RACV is fine however.

        • billdsl on 10/05/2024 - 08:00

          Allianz & Australia Post are apparently two very well priced insurers for Tesla's FYI

      • OceanMachine on 12/05/2024 - 19:48

        Who are you insured with?
        I also have a gen 2 leaf (a Nismo) i imported, and everyone except Shannons and Enthusiast Motor said they outright wouldnt insure any grey import.

        I think RACV said they would, but at an insane cost.

    • surg3on on 09/05/2024 - 09:04
      +4

      Thats odd. I actually own a BYD and its insurance cost is comparable to my hybrid (AAMI).

      • pformag on 09/05/2024 - 11:41

        When did you insure last? My insurance with AAMI for a 2017 Ford Territory increased 40% last month.

        • surg3on on 09/05/2024 - 16:56

          Im not saying mine didnt go up. Its just both cars went up and its got nothing to do with EVs. It wasnt 40% though. More like ~20%

    • Buy2Much on 09/05/2024 - 09:12
      +1

      Even more so for makers that build batteries into the structure/frames of the cars (BYD and the likes). Once the structure is compromised, the car will likely be a write off.

    • MagnamoniousRex on 09/05/2024 - 09:27
      +4

      This isn't unique to electrics at all, my bike just took 9 months to get a new brake disk.

    • sovereign01 on 09/05/2024 - 09:54
      -2

      This is a Tesla problem more than an EV problem.

    • lunchbox99 on 09/05/2024 - 14:09

      The cheapest way is to pay the insurance without having a car. The rate will be surprisingly competitive.

    • tessel on 09/05/2024 - 14:18
      +1

      Yup, lots of ppl on FB groups reporting this. After the first year the insurance cost sky rockets.

    • lazybones1987 on 09/05/2024 - 17:33

      I have an ICE and an EV. Both are insured with different companies. The premiums of my ICE car increased by 30%. I had a not at fault accident (after premium increase) of my ICE car and had to wait for 2 months for a headlight replacement.

    • rickdwp on 10/05/2024 - 00:19
      +2

      This is super anecdotal though, my premium went up 15% or so on a Model Y (which brings it to abit under $1,400)

      Meanwhile my mates model 3 got rear ended and was back on the road in under a month. But this means nothing, people just run with whatever story's suit there narrative and resort to old man yells at cloud

      • bigbadboogieman on 10/05/2024 - 08:06

        Your comment is super anecdotal in my opinion. Someone hit my brother in law's (lives in LA) Model Y and busted the lane detection sensor and dented the bumper on the left side. 10 months later he is still waiting for parts and repair costs to be approved by the insurer because replacing the sensor and bumper is upwards of USD 10K.

        • rickdwp on 10/05/2024 - 10:17
          +3

          That's my whole point lol, it's all anecdotal. People will only tell the story's that suit there narrative

          • bigbadboogieman on 10/05/2024 - 17:01

            @rickdwp: Or people will just tell their stories. A narrative is something for the lobby groups and big shots who can afford to have a narrative in this economy

  • cooldog on 09/05/2024 - 08:22
    +4

    Nobody want a Nissan EV,we need BYD.

    • AngusD on 09/05/2024 - 08:25
      +31

      Why not neither?

      celebratory Mexican music

    • Caped Baldy on 09/05/2024 - 08:32
      +21

      I want a skyline

    • gakko on 09/05/2024 - 08:52
      +4

      I think the leafs are pretty solid. They deserve a bit more love but their shaky start hurt them.

      • fuzor on 09/05/2024 - 08:58
        +15

        They need battery thermal management. I cant believe OP is writing that they still haven't got it. Relying on passive thermal management is what killed the 1st gen. Bit of a letdown from Nissan.

        • iDroid on 09/05/2024 - 21:47

          It's pretty cool in japan.

          Just say'n.

      • klaw81 on 09/05/2024 - 09:28
        +20

        They're not "solid" - the lack of active cooling is a major and obvious flaw that will significantly reduce the useful life of the entire product. Nissan should have pulled the Leaf from sale when the issues with this became apparent - an updated model with retrofitted cooling should have been released to replace it.

        At the standard RRP of ~$50k, this is an absolute insult to customers. At ~$40k it's still a terrible buy, considering the excellent alternatives available.

        their shaky start hurt them

        This is still the shaky start. They still has the same flaw that gave them a shaky start, and Nissan are still trying to sell it, knowing that the flaw exists.

        • Ultraman on 09/05/2024 - 10:03
          +3

          If they had fixed it these would be instabuy status for many I'd say.

        • kaikor on 09/05/2024 - 10:26
          +1

          Maybe they will drop it again to under $30k if this offer not going well

      • 811b11e8 on 09/05/2024 - 10:42
        +6

        Its not solid, third parties having to make replacement batteries for these with active cooling.

        Your literally buying a car with obsolete charging and a battery that won't last like the competition.

        BYD is a better buy.

    • pacificstorm on 09/05/2024 - 09:15
      -8

      Nobody want a Nissan EV,we need BYD.

      Wat do these stand for? Is it an anagram, abbreviations for sumthin, figure of speech, slang, literary or figuratively, an alternative, or sumthin else rather?

      • May4th on 09/05/2024 - 09:19
        +16

        Why are you typing like a 8th grader?

        • Papa Huggies on 09/05/2024 - 09:23
          +5

          The real question

        • AngusD on 09/05/2024 - 09:30
          +6

          I want a refund of whatever portion of my taxes is being spent on education if this is the result it's producing.

          • sauce2k on 09/05/2024 - 09:40

            @AngusD: if there is going to be a petition, I'm in

        • beltdrive on 09/05/2024 - 09:48
          -1

          Why are you typing like an American?

          • May4th on 09/05/2024 - 11:18

            @beltdrive: i didn't neg, but we don't have year 8 in australia? it would explain the typing

            • beltdrive on 09/05/2024 - 11:26

              @May4th: we have a year 8, not 8th grade. I figured that if you're gonna be pedantic, I can be too

      • rodericb on 09/05/2024 - 09:31

        Bring Your own Device.

        • pacificstorm on 09/05/2024 - 09:41
          -6

          Jus askin a legit question or a query peeps. No need to go on attack formation. This is not a Dune 2 situation after all. Sheesh.

          • beltdrive on 09/05/2024 - 10:14
            +2

            @pacificstorm: Don't stress, unfortunately some people have nothing better to do than fret over something as trivial as someone typing "sumthin"

      • Nuggets on 09/05/2024 - 10:36
        +5

        The "BYD" name is the pinyin initials of the company's Chinese name Biyadi, which itself was created from company's original trademark Yadi Electronics (亚迪电子, named after the Yadi Road in Dapeng New District, where the company was once based) and the character Bi was just conveniently added to give the company an alphabetical advantage in trade shows. The company later created a backronym slogan "Build Your Dreams".

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BYD_Company

      • klaw81 on 09/05/2024 - 11:40

        Since nobody has answered your question, the actual works are "Build Your Dreams"

    • beltdrive on 09/05/2024 - 09:51
      +6

      It's happened sooner than I expected

      People are starting to show preference to Chinese cars over Japanese cars (an actual MIJ car at that)

      • JIMB0 on 09/05/2024 - 10:18
        +6

        No surprises there. Nissan's have been crap for a long time.

        • beltdrive on 09/05/2024 - 10:26

          True, probably the Japanese make I'd be least inclined to buy. Do Mitsubishis suck too? Haven't been paying that much attention to them

          • JIMB0 on 09/05/2024 - 10:35
            +2

            @beltdrive: The new models are based on Nissan's, so I'd avoid them. The old ones were very reliable, they didn't change much over the years which gave them plenty of time work out any problems.

      • 1st-Amendment on 09/05/2024 - 10:27
        +1

        People are starting to show preference to Chinese cars over Japanese cars

        Yeah but people have always bought shit. The monthly sales figures are all still mostly Japs and Koreans…

        • beltdrive on 09/05/2024 - 10:28
          +3

          exactly. personally I wouldn't buy a BYD, Nissan or a Peugeot

      • greennick on 09/05/2024 - 11:05
        +4

        I would rather a Japanese ICE car than a Chinese one for sure and the sales numbers obviously back that up. I would rather a Japanese plug-in hybrid or hybrid. The Japanese have been slow to electric, however I would expect them to catch-up, just as the Europeans have.

    • edfoo on 09/05/2024 - 10:45
      +1

      $50K for that Leaf e+? I rather buy a BYD Dolphin Premium or MG4 Essence 64, better EV than this one.

    • Guybrush57 on 09/05/2024 - 08:32
      +55

      I know right? Petrol cars never catch fire in collisions.

      /s

      • boomramada on 09/05/2024 - 08:37
        +2

        Don't have much info on EVs on the crash, but only a insignificant amount of ICE catch fire on collision, the majority are on movies.

        • Captain Hindsight on 09/05/2024 - 09:54
          +3

          I'd love to see some real data comparing the 2.

          Edit: just saw some useful links below seems EVs less likely to catch fire than ice.

          • enigma48 on 09/05/2024 - 09:58
            +16

            @Captain Hindsight: A 2022 analysis by insurance company AutoinsuranceEZ showed that based on US-based National Transport and Safety Board data, ICE vehicles are 60 times more likely to catch fire than electric vehicles and hybrid vehicles are 138 times more likely to catch fire (it is not clear how the analysis defines plug-in hybrids.)
            https://www.mynrma.com.au/electric-vehicles/basics/understan…

            The Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency (MSB) reported 23 fires in 611,000 EVs during 2022, or 0.004 per cent in a year, which makes it 20 times less likely to happen than ICE car fires, which burned 3,400 times in 4.4 million cars, or 0.08 per cent. MSB has also recently proven a new way to extinguish battery fires fast.
            https://www.topgear.com/car-news/mythbusting-evs/mythbusting…

            This isn't a pure apples-to-apples comparison (there are many 10 year old ICE cars vs EVs) but looking at the numbers, we should be much more worried about ICE fires. But humans are more scared of headlines than facts.

      • CocaKoala on 09/05/2024 - 08:55
        +8

        There's a stark difference between a petrol fire and a battery going into a thermal runaway. These are not similar by any measure.

        • choofa on 09/05/2024 - 09:16
          +13

          True. Petrol cars explode immediately in a massive fireball. Batteries tend to have lots of small long lasting explosions which you can walk away from and then stand around and watch it burn for two weeks

          • PonyTable on 09/05/2024 - 09:21

            @choofa: Winter is coming.

          • CocaKoala on 09/05/2024 - 09:39
            -5

            @choofa: I would not stand anywhere near a burning battery given all the carcinogens it pumps out. Flames could also shoot out at extremely high temperatures as the gases escaping also are flammable.

            Batteries don't need to be in a collision to get into a thermal runaway either. They could just be sitting in a garage one moment, and start off gassing the next and before you know there will be an explosion - I mean the first explosion of many in weeks to come as it continues to expel toxic gases, amiright.

            • Anthropomorphised on 09/05/2024 - 11:44
              +6

              @CocaKoala: 1) all cars burning put out carcinogens, don't stand near one regardless of whether it's an EV or not lol
              2) You're painting all batteries with the same brush which is a gross oversimplification that belies a lack of understanding. For example, thermal runaway is a genuine concern with NMC batteries, it is not a significant concern with LFP batteries however.

              • CocaKoala on 09/05/2024 - 11:54
                +1

                @Anthropomorphised:

                all cars burning put out carcinogens, don't stand near one regardless of whether it's an EV or not lol

                Ah, thanks mate. Perhaps you could tell the other guy who wanted to stand and watch a burning ev for weeks. Because I already told I wouldn't stand near one. Also, could you tell me if a burning ev puts out more toxins than a burning petrol car? EV fire safe group seems to think this is a major concern that they need to specify it, but perhaps they may not know as much as you do.

                You're painting all batteries with the same brush which is a gross oversimplification that belies a lack of understanding. For example, thermal runaway is a genuine concern with NMC batteries, it is not a significant concern with LFP batteries however.

                I merely mentioned that the possibility of a thermal runaway exists, no matter the battery type and once the reaction starts they are all the same.

                See my response below for more info.

          • 1st-Amendment on 09/05/2024 - 10:40
            +1

            @choofa:

            Petrol cars explode immediately in a massive fireball

            In Hollywood maybe…

            Batteries tend to have lots of small long lasting explosions which you can walk away

            You've clearly never seen an EV battery fire: https://youtu.be/T71cVhxG_v4?t=61

            • choofa on 09/05/2024 - 10:58
              +3

              @1st-Amendment: I was joking lol
              I can find you videos of petrol cars exploding and petrol stations exploding if you want.
              I’ve seen a petrol tanker crash that rolled and exploded. I was a few km away and it lit up the night like daylight and then started a bushfire that burnt hundreds of hectares of bushland

    • Caped Baldy on 09/05/2024 - 08:35
      +14

      EV's are actually less prone to explode vs ICE vehicles by a factor of 10. That said, most EVs are less than 10 years old and when they do catch fire it is tougher to put out with conventional means.

      • boomramada on 09/05/2024 - 08:55
        -1

        EV's are actually less prone to explode vs ICE vehicles by a factor of 10

        Where did you pull those stats out of?

        • Caped Baldy on 09/05/2024 - 09:12
          +13

          According to nrma, it's actually a factor of 60. I did see a drive article where it said it was a factor of 100 but the data was from an EV proponent source so won't include a link.

          https://www.mynrma.com.au/electric-vehicles/basics/understan….)

          • boomramada on 09/05/2024 - 09:28
            -6

            @Caped Baldy: Okie, one has a sample size of 1500k and the other has 25k. EV sample with fairly new cars vs ICE, new to ancient cars that probably don't even have any safety record during its production.

            And the next issue is suppressing EV fires vs ICE.

        • Nom on 09/05/2024 - 09:14
          +5

          There's a great article at https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/nov/20/do-electric… that includes numerous sources.

        • andyfc on 09/05/2024 - 09:27
          -1

          A recent RISE report, (ISBN: 978-91-89757-90-5), reviewed Swedish, US, and Chinese data and puts the likelihood of fire 8-10 X higher in an ICEV, compared to an EV. However caveats that the EV fleet is new, and may change as the fleet ages.

          Thatcham analysis (unfortunately no link) in the UK states the average fire claim rate of EVs vs ICEV was 7x lower. Same caveat likely applies, as above.

          Both of these are much more conservative than insurance data that was commonly shared initially about rates of fire starts in EVs vs ICEV in the US which showed fire start rates 60x lower ('AutoinsuranceEZ').

          Finally EV fire safe (research group in Australia) actually state that 50% of EV fires don't actually involve the lithium ion battery, they are the result of a seperate fire start (arson, fire spread, or another electrical fault in the vehicle).

          Hope that helps.

      • CocaKoala on 09/05/2024 - 09:45

        tougher to put out with conventional means.

        Translation: EV fires can't be extinguished as it's self-oxidising.

        For the sake of people who don't know, you could submerge a burning ev into your pool and it will just carry on burning for days or even weeks.

        • edvoon on 09/05/2024 - 10:21
          +6

          That's not true. Fire departments have found that cooling the pack down with a lot of water does stop the fire.
          This is not because of lack of oxygen like a conventional fire, but that the temperature comes down enough so that there is no longer that chain reaction igniting another cell.
          Yes there is a small chance of it self-igniting afterwards due to damage already sustained but it's all a known quantity now that they've had more than a handful of fires to gain experience from.

          The point being that there had been so few EV fires that it's taken them this long to get a working knowledgebase on how to fight it.

          It's all in the https://www.evfiresafe.com/ website if you bother to look.

          • CocaKoala on 09/05/2024 - 11:27
            +2

            @edvoon:

            That's not true.

            What is not true?

            Fire departments have found that cooling the pack down with a lot of water does stop the fire.

            And how would one "cool the pack down with lots of water" when you can't even spray water directly at the pack?! You do realise this cannot be done in practice because the runoff water is extremely carcinogenic/toxic and cannot be allowed to come in contact with waterways, storm drains, etc. If you're going to pump ~10,000 litres of water on a car to cool it down, how exactly do you prescribe capturing that much runoff and transporting it elsewhere? And what to do with that water if you somehow magically managed to capture every last drop it?

            It's all in the https://www.evfiresafe.com/ website if you bother to look.

            Do you bother to look at your own source?! Obviously no, so let me spoon-feed you instead.

            How do firefighters put out an EV battery fire?
            Due to the self-sustaining nature of thermal runaway, ​we've moved away from using the word 'extinguish' in relation to lithium-ion battery fires and instead prefer to discuss how we suppress & contain them.

            And this is done primarily with 3 methods - cool, burn, or submerge.

            Cooling - I explained why this is practically impossible to do without contaminating our waterways with carcinogens and toxins.

            From the source you quoted that was supposed to prove me "wrong":
            EV battery fire suppression - cool
            Use fog nozzles to knock down flames & provide cooling jets onto battery pack exterior to cool down the exothermic reaction of thermal runaway.

            Pros:
            Recommended by all EV manufacturers
            Firefighters are 'seen' to be doing something by public

            Cons:
            Doesn't get water where it needs to be
            Like 'putting out a kitchen fire by spraying water on the roof of a house'
            Water usage may be in excess of 10,000 litres
            Run off will need to be monitored & captured, particularly near waterways
            ​

            Burn - needs no explanation but I would note that these fires burn at EXTREMELY high temperatures and may explode repeatedly while burning, and will pollute the surrounding air with toxins and carcinogens. The fire cannot be smothered like a petrol fire.

            Submerge - I already explained it, but let's quote your source:

            "Pros":
            Contains fire spread
            Manages incident relatively quickly
            Firefighters are 'seen' to be doing something by public

            Cons:
            Containment units may not be available or in close enough proximity
            Water usage may be in excess of 10,000 litres
            EV may need to remain in water for days/weeks
            Thermal runaway will continue underwater (didn't I say that as well?!)
            Time for thermal runaway to conclude depends on battery capacity & state of charge
            Water will need to be treated for disposal which can be expensive

    • dvsbastard on 09/05/2024 - 08:35
      +11

      You know petrol and LPG are extremely combustible too, right?

      • PonyTable on 09/05/2024 - 09:23
        +6

        Always wondered what the C in ICE stood for.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join