• On TechRepublic: Windows 7: Slower to boot than Vista?
advertisementFind tech advice for business here
August 14, 2009 11:42 AM PDT

Nissan claims 367 mpg for electric Leaf

by Antuan Goodwin
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 38 comments

Nissan Leaf

How does the Leaf get huge miles per gallon without actually using gallons?

(Credit: Nissan)

OK, these ridiculous mpg claims are starting to get out of hand. Earlier this week, General Motors announced an estimated 230 mpg for the upcoming Volt extended-range EV--a claim that was later undermined by the EPA. No doubt attempting to steal a bit of GM's thunder, Nissan claimed (via Twitter) that its upcoming Leaf EV could do better:

"Nissan Leaf = 367 mpg, no tailpipe, and no gas required. Oh yeah, and it'll be affordable too!"

At first, we thought this was an odd claim to make, seeing that the Leaf is fully electric and (as stated in the same tweet) doesn't actually use gasoline or diesel fuel. Nissan, followed up later with another tweet stating that they were using a DOE formula to estimate the 367 mpg equivalency for the electric LEAF, but doesn't that just confuse prospective customers further with obtuse conversions?

What do you think, wise and noble reader? In a world where vehicles run on gasoline, diesel, hydrogen, ethanol, alcohol, natural gas, and electricity (to name a few), is it time for a new efficiency metric or should we stick with old faithful (if not sometimes inapplicable) miles per gallon?

Topics:

Hybrids and green

Tags:

Nissan,

Leaf,

EV,

PHEV,

GM,

Chevrolet,

Volt

Share:
Digg
Del.icio.us
Reddit
Recent posts from The Car Tech blog
Infiniti quality effort features a woman's touch
Xtreme Mustang: Verts in a concrete jungle
Google Maps Navigation arrives for Android 1.6
Some BMWs will get four-cylinder engines
The 2010 Panamera: Porsche goes sedan?
Car Tech Live Podcast 145: An Audi that drives itself
Nissan's sporty Altima
U.S. Mazda2 launching at Los Angeles Auto Show
Add a Comment (Log in or register) Showing 1 of 2 pages (38 Comments)
by mjn507 August 14, 2009 12:27 PM PDT
For something that is completely electric, miles per gallon seems quite silly. Instead, perhaps we should see "miles per charge". It at least makes sense to me.
Reply to this comment
by 1kWealth August 19, 2009 3:06 PM PDT
Nissan sees the capability for dramatic user cost-savings versus a traditional internal-combustion equivalent. Using typical Japanese market figures as a starting point, the automaker says an equivalent internal-combustion vehicle's fuel consumption figure of 20 km/liter (47.5 mpg U.S.) over 1,000 km/month (620 miles) costs about 6,000 yen per month ? about $63 U.S. dollars. Conversely, assuming the same operating parameters for the Leaf (using a charge cycle using cheaper nighttime energy rates), Nissan sees an operating cost for its ZEV of just 1,200 yen per month ¬? less than $13. Of course, American drivers will likely pile on far more miles per month on average, and our energy costs differ, but the point is clear ? the automaker sees the Leaf as having real money-saving potential.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$13.00 for 620 miles...not bad
by yanchineseguy August 14, 2009 12:33 PM PDT
MPKW = Miles per killowatt?
Reply to this comment
by bornlikethis38 August 14, 2009 10:36 PM PDT
still think it should be something different. power plants use kilowatt hours, or mega/giga, while batteries measure power by voltage. But as electric cars become more mainstream, then we will see something but it will start with miles per charge, however many miles you can go on a whole battery. Quick question for anyone and everyone: how will people adjust to using a fully electric car for road trips? the faster you go on the interstate highways will drain the battery much faster? I'm sure there is a needle in these cars that tell the batteries charge left, but where do you restore power? a hotel over night every couple hundred miles?
by fight_global_warming August 14, 2009 11:13 PM PDT
kilowatt measures power. kilowatt-hour (kWh) measures electric energy. This is the unit used by your utility company when they bill you for electricity used. So this leaves us with: Miles per kWh?
by GreySB August 14, 2009 12:41 PM PDT
As a long time follower of the Volt. the biggest difference between any of these pure electric vehicles and any eRev is the ability to fill up with gas and keep going. Once the power is gone from the pure electric - your dead. As for the Volt - the first 40 miles is pure electric and the next 300 is electric generated by a small efficient engine. If you need to go more then that - just get more gas and keep going. For someone like myself (and 75% of americans) who commute less then 40 miles a day, I would use no gas. BUT if I had to, I could go as far as needed and I would not be limited by any power capacity (just the ability to find the nearest gas station)
Reply to this comment
by garimell August 14, 2009 12:47 PM PDT
Cents per mile?! Declare what-price-per-gallon-of-gas is being used for the math or how much the electricity costs for a full charge starting from a completely depleted battery. Estimate over a 500 mile run to cover eRevs properly.
Reply to this comment
by djjeesh August 14, 2009 12:54 PM PDT
So now we'll see our money for gas going down and our electric bills going up.
Reply to this comment
by bornlikethis38 August 14, 2009 10:37 PM PDT
my parents just got a 600 dollar electric bill, and we don't have an electric car or hybrid.
by RussBinder August 16, 2009 4:06 PM PDT
For the same transportation benefit (miles driven, people/cargo moved, etc.) in either a gas or electric car, if your gas bill goes down, say, $100 and your electric bill goes up $25, why is bad?

The right measure of economy, given a standard load/speed/distance test, and regardless of what fuel is used (gas, electricity, alcohol, diesel, hydrogen, salad oil, old magazines, whatever...) is $/mile or miles/$. Nobody cares whether it's gas, electricity or Yoo-Hoo that they put in the tank or get from the wall - it all comes down to total spend vs. total get. Always has, always will. Refrigerators and other appliances have an estimated annual cost of ownership sticker, based on some standard assumptions, so that you can compare one to another. Cars, regardless of fuel, could have the same thing almost as easily enough.
by ohsohappydaddy August 14, 2009 1:07 PM PDT
Why not just take a gas run portable generator, fill it with a gallon of gas, plug the drained car into it, charge it up and if it is fully charged before the gas runs out then turn off the generator, drive the car until dead again, write down the milage each time, keep repeating and add up the miles at the end to get the mpg rating LOL
Reply to this comment
by August 14, 2009 1:08 PM PDT
How about something like "miles per dollar"? I know that even this would be a bit weird though, as gas and electricity prices are different from place to place. But that is essentially what customers would like to know: How does the price of running an electric car compare to a gasoline-powered car?
Reply to this comment
by heulenwolf August 14, 2009 1:10 PM PDT
Electric cars are a whole new thing. Its time to leave the old measures behind. You don't hear about how many horsepower these cars have, do you? More useful would be the suggested Miles/kW recommended by yanchineseguy. Additionally, they should be spec'd by a standard estimate of cost, too. For example, the current EPA mileage statements on the car's sticker often include an estimate of yearly fuel cost assuming a price of gas and mileage driven per year. Some measure of Miles / $ (since power prices tend to be rather stable by region) or $/year would be good, too.
Reply to this comment
by fleurya August 14, 2009 1:23 PM PDT
They might as well say:

"We think the average person is really stupid. So stupid, that if we give them information other than MPG, they'll probably start grunting like apes and throw rocks at us. So instead, we'll keep the retarded masses happy and keep giving them MPG ratings on all electrivc vehicles."

I would take this POS if they gave it to me.
Reply to this comment
by craftj2 August 14, 2009 1:50 PM PDT
A gallon of gasoline is a unit of energy just like a kWh is. One gallon of gasoline has the same energy as 36.6 kWh. So a 24 kWh battery like the Nissan Leaf has is equal to 0.65 gallons of gasoline (lets call 36.6 kWh a "gallon of electrons"). The Leaf can go 100 miles on 0.65 gallons of electrons. 100 miles / 0.65 "gallons = 153 MPG.

That's the fuel efficiency. Anything else is lies.
Reply to this comment
by bornlikethis38 August 14, 2009 10:39 PM PDT
now that's the kind of comment I'm lookin for!
by Slimg02 August 18, 2009 11:55 AM PDT
The force is strong with you craftj2 truth you tell yes....lol
by tilgare August 25, 2009 9:15 AM PDT
I don't understand any of your reasoning in your comment. First, where do you get the arbitrary gasoline to kWh coefficient? Assuming that they are not "telling lies", either your figure for miles or gallons would be incorrect. Assuming one of your calculations is correct, either, the Leaf can go 238.55 miles / 0.65 "gallons" or the correct equivalency would be 0.27 meaning 100 mi / 0.27"g" = 367 mpg.
by codyjames60 August 14, 2009 1:54 PM PDT
Should really be rated in miles per ton of coal burned.
Reply to this comment
by RLJ327 August 17, 2009 8:38 AM PDT
Hello, there are many sources of electricity and all are not from coal. The source of electricity I like is from the solar panels on the roof of my house. My electric bill has gone from $160 a month to $2 a month. Also, it takes energy (about 12 kWh) to explore for oil, drill, pump, ship, refine, distribute, and pump a gallon of gasoline into a car. If this energy is used directly by an electric car, which can go about 48 miles on 12 kWh, we would be net savers of energy compared to a gasoline car, which can go about 30 MPG. And, if you add up the energy to produce a gallon of gasoline (12 kWh) plus the energy in the gallon of gasoline (33.7 kWh), you get 45.7 kWh. A 100% electric car can go about 183 miles on 45.7 kWh, which is over 6 times farther than a gasoline car can go on one gallon of gasoline. Plus, when people drive electric cars no kids have to die in Iraq for oil and no money is sent overseas to fund terrorist organizations.
by EvanSei August 14, 2009 1:57 PM PDT
the car companies trying to pull the wool over our eyes, electricity costs money, but they don't want to talk about that. 367 mpg my eye
Reply to this comment
by pquade August 14, 2009 3:02 PM PDT
The EPA absolutely MUST find a different way to calculate energy efficiency. Actually it's rather simple, kilowatts per mile.

In those terms, my hunch is that neither the Volt nor Leaf are particularly impressive.
Reply to this comment
by bornlikethis38 August 14, 2009 10:40 PM PDT
The tesla is pretty impressive
by RLJ327 August 17, 2009 9:29 AM PDT
The Tesla uses 218 watts per mile. A gasoline car which gets 30 MPG uses 1,123 watts per mile. I think it is the gasoline car which is not particularly impressive.
by MadLyb August 14, 2009 3:04 PM PDT
Chevy and Nissan are only hurting themselves by throwing these numbers out by destroying any credibility they have.
Reply to this comment
by PhoenixFiresky August 14, 2009 3:06 PM PDT
And just HOW are we supposed to decide if that silly number (367 mpg) will allow us to save ourselves any money on fuel?

Nope, sorry. Still sticking with the Aptera hybrid when it becomes available.
Reply to this comment
by bornlikethis38 August 14, 2009 10:42 PM PDT
OMG!!!!! Thank you! No one else seems to know that Aptera exists. That car (while its exterior style is strange) beats the **** out of any other hybrids.
by kormiko August 14, 2009 3:07 PM PDT
Any car company that claims more miles per gallon than miles the car can go on one charge is not worth listening to. I think it's great that the Leaf can go 100 miles on a charge without a tailpipe. Just leave it at that. And I'm tired of people talking about "What about the electricity plant? That gives off blah blah when you charge your car." I don't know about you, but I pay at least some of my money towards green power and don't oil companies and gas stations use electricity too? This is more about making the transition away from foreign oil. It's not going to be perfect in the beginning, but we have to start somewhere. Besides, I'm tired of oil stains on my driveway.
Reply to this comment
by shalmanassar August 14, 2009 8:36 PM PDT
we still refer to horsepower (anybody ever seen 400 horses pull anything together?) MPG is a culturally adaptive phrase that could be used to relay an empirical measurement.
Reply to this comment
by bornlikethis38 August 14, 2009 10:44 PM PDT
so what does one standard horse pull in joules? are we talking about a Budweiser clydesdale? or an amateur race horse?
by fight_global_warming August 14, 2009 11:10 PM PDT
Electric energy is measured in kWh (as opposed to kW which measure power). A kWh is not a lot of energy so miles per kWh wouldn't make much sense... however kWh per mile should work fine. Contrary to mpg, a lower value would mean better efficiency. This would bring the US closer the rest of the world that measures fuel efficiency in l/100km (lower value = use less fuel).
Reply to this comment
by RLJ327 August 15, 2009 9:41 AM PDT
The real choice here is not MPG or kWh it?s being dependent on foreign oil or not being dependent on foreign oil. Since gasoline is measured in gallons, miles per gallon (MPG) makes since to use as a measure of performance when the only source of energy for a car is gasoline or even diesel. But when a car can be plugged in, it now has another source of energy. So to measure the Volt?s mileage in MPG is misleading and false. Electricity is measured in kWh, so miles per kWh would make sense. For most people that relate better to MPG the conversion from miles per kWh to "equivalent" MPG (eMPG) is simple, just multiply miles per kWh by 33.7 to get eMPG, since one gallon of gasoline has 33.7 kWh of energy in it. A gasoline powered car, which gets 33.7 MPG (1 mile per kWh), is an efficient car by today's standards. The 100% electric cars being built today get on average 4 miles per kWh or 135 eMPG. Since electric cars can go 4 times farther than gasoline cars on the same amount of energy and reduce our dependence on foreign oil, electric cars are the way of future and electric cars powered by renewable sources of energy like the sun is really the way of the future. The 100% electric Tesla can go 0 to 60 MPH in 3.9 seconds, has a range of 244 miles and gets more than 135 eMPG. The price of electric cars, just like the price of PCs, cell phones, and HDTVs, will come down over time and as charge times improve and the number of charging locations increases, electric cars will be used for much longer trips.
Reply to this comment
by xmirage2kx August 15, 2009 1:10 PM PDT
Cost Per Mile. Then compare the cost per kWh to gas in miles. So If you go 200 miles on $40 with a gas car and go 400 miles on $40 with an electric car... the math is pretty easy to do. the only "hard" part is the changes in gas/electric prices.
Reply to this comment
Showing 1 of 2 pages (38 Comments)

Search Car Tech

advertisement

About The Car Tech blog

CNET's Car Tech blog covers the latest developments in the automotive industry, with commentary on car stereos, hybrid and concept cars, GPS, and much more. The Car Tech blog offers the latest news and reviews from CNET's Car Tech reviews channel.

Add this feed to your online news reader

The Car Tech blog topics

Reviews & advice
Site map
Editorial policies
Meet the editors
How we test
Forums
Internet speed test
Popular topics
Apple iPhone
Apple iPod
Cell phones
Dell
GPS
LCD TV
CNET sites
CNET Site map
CNET TV
Downloads
News
Reviews
Shopper.com
More information
Newsletters
CNET Mobile
Customer Help Center
RSS
CNET Widgets
About CNET
sponsored