Nissan and Honda plan to enter into negotiations for a merger to better compete in the rapidly changing automotive industry, the Nikkei newspaper reported.
That sounds like a disaster for Honda. Nissan doesn’t hardly have anything to offer except supply/sales volume. Honda beats them on engine tech, transmission tech, chassis tech, basically everything. Honda has lots to lose by taking on their mess, and Nissan doesn’t.
I don’t know about in Japan, but in the US, Nissan has a sub-$30k EV with the Leaf and Honda does not. So that would be worth something to them considering California is trying to phase out ICE cars.
That’s still only a single model that is <8% of Nissan’s already abysmal US sales volume. Nissan’s massive pile of garbage that fills up the rest of portfolio (and institutional problems behind the scenes) is absolutely NOT worth dealing with for the technology in a single model like that, even if it is “necessary” to offer to ensure compliance eith wishy washy regulatory soon-to-be’s. They would be much better off clean-slating their own, EV tech is significantly easier to develop compared to new ICE designs and if anyone is capable of that, it’s Honda.
It is a big, untapped market but it’s not a big market for the Leaf. Tesla sold 3x more Model 3 in the last year alone than Nissan has sold in the entire 14 year production run of the Leaf. It’s a hot mess.
I think it’s more that they don’t want to choose the lowest quality option when making such a large purchase. I’d rather spend an extra few thousand, spread over 5 years or whatever term length you choose, to get something that gives more power, range, and features than be stuck with a low quality EV that barely gets a 100 mile range after my loan is paid off.
The Bolt is another cheap EV that sells quite a bit better than the Leaf but still it’s a tiny fraction of what more expensive models like the Model 3 or Ioniq 5 sell because it’s so limited. You aren’t going to fit your family of 4 or 5 inside on comfortably, so why not just spend a little more to get something that can be used outside of solo work commutes if you’re going to be spending tens of thousands on it either way?
It’s the same reason why people buy trucks even if they only need a truck 2-3 times a year. It’s better to have a vehicle that can check all the boxes than something that’ll perform well in only a few areas of use.
Well, we are talking about buying new cars, so I wouldn’t consider that the right choice for someone living paycheck to paycheck.
I’m simply pointing out that it doesn’t make sense to spend $35k on a shitbox when you can spend $40k on something decent. When cash is tight, it makes sense to go for the best value even if it means spending a fraction more up front (or in this case, spread out over multiple years). How will you feel about the $35k you spent on the car when you can’t use it because the range is shit and the battery wears out quickly from constantly draining and recharging its entire capacity?
This is not any different than buying a $1000 used car that costs you $5000 in gas per year versus a $5000 car that costs $1000 in gas per year. Which one would you pick?
Except the chevy volt is in the same sub 30k category and they handily beat the pants off of the leaf in range. The leaf only gets a meager 149 miles per charge. The volt can go about 100 miles further and has the ability to charge faster.
Why are you giving a question mark? The only leaf under $30k is the base with a 149 mile range. The sv plus with the 212 range is like $37k. That’s $10,000 more than a volt and still like 30 or 40 miles less range.
Also, yes, 149 would be enough for most people who never want a vehicleto take out of town, but you’re leaving out a huge amount of problems with a range like that. First, if you’re going to charge it every day it means you better own a house and garage to keep it in and charge, because charging stations for 45 minutes every other day or so would be terrible to deal with. Then if you live in a place where it gets really cold that mileage will be hacked down to about 110 miles. Plus, your battery will not last nearly as long if you have to use most of its range all the time and always have to charge it up to 100% full. Charging an EV up to just 80% or so capacity and recharging it at about 20% will literally double the lifespan of the battery. A small capacity EV like that won’t last nearly as long as one with a bigger battery.
I absolutely agree with you there. For consumer space this merger doesn’t make sense for Honda. For Nissan share holder, this is fantastic… Only thing I can think of is Nissan has some EV tech that Honda could use but that’s quite the stretch. Nissan actually jumped into EV relatively early but they didn’t iterate on it quickly enough to matter. Honda has been dragging their feet on EV and they both completely missed the boat on bridge tech offering like plug in hybrid. This merger isn’t going to do anything to fix that.
Since Nissan is now a low end brand and Honda is moving more towards premium side perhaps being together would cover the market segments better. The merger absolutely does nothing for the high end market though.
The one thing that I don’t know anything about is the commercial market domestically in Japan. Perhaps Nissan has good market share which Honda could gain from this merger. Maybe someone could chime in on this.
That sounds like a disaster for Honda. Nissan doesn’t hardly have anything to offer except supply/sales volume. Honda beats them on engine tech, transmission tech, chassis tech, basically everything. Honda has lots to lose by taking on their mess, and Nissan doesn’t.
I don’t know about in Japan, but in the US, Nissan has a sub-$30k EV with the Leaf and Honda does not. So that would be worth something to them considering California is trying to phase out ICE cars.
https://insideevs.com/news/744407/ev-california-gas-car-sales-ban-2035/
That’s still only a single model that is <8% of Nissan’s already abysmal US sales volume. Nissan’s massive pile of garbage that fills up the rest of portfolio (and institutional problems behind the scenes) is absolutely NOT worth dealing with for the technology in a single model like that, even if it is “necessary” to offer to ensure compliance eith wishy washy regulatory soon-to-be’s. They would be much better off clean-slating their own, EV tech is significantly easier to develop compared to new ICE designs and if anyone is capable of that, it’s Honda.
It’s a single model and virtually the only model of EV less affluent Americans can afford. That’s a huge market.
It is a big, untapped market but it’s not a big market for the Leaf. Tesla sold 3x more Model 3 in the last year alone than Nissan has sold in the entire 14 year production run of the Leaf. It’s a hot mess.
The Model 3 is over $40,000. It’s selling more because Americans are barely even aware cheaper EVs exist.
I think it’s more that they don’t want to choose the lowest quality option when making such a large purchase. I’d rather spend an extra few thousand, spread over 5 years or whatever term length you choose, to get something that gives more power, range, and features than be stuck with a low quality EV that barely gets a 100 mile range after my loan is paid off.
The Bolt is another cheap EV that sells quite a bit better than the Leaf but still it’s a tiny fraction of what more expensive models like the Model 3 or Ioniq 5 sell because it’s so limited. You aren’t going to fit your family of 4 or 5 inside on comfortably, so why not just spend a little more to get something that can be used outside of solo work commutes if you’re going to be spending tens of thousands on it either way?
It’s the same reason why people buy trucks even if they only need a truck 2-3 times a year. It’s better to have a vehicle that can check all the boxes than something that’ll perform well in only a few areas of use.
It must be nice to have an extra few thousand to spend.
Well, we are talking about buying new cars, so I wouldn’t consider that the right choice for someone living paycheck to paycheck.
I’m simply pointing out that it doesn’t make sense to spend $35k on a shitbox when you can spend $40k on something decent. When cash is tight, it makes sense to go for the best value even if it means spending a fraction more up front (or in this case, spread out over multiple years). How will you feel about the $35k you spent on the car when you can’t use it because the range is shit and the battery wears out quickly from constantly draining and recharging its entire capacity?
This is not any different than buying a $1000 used car that costs you $5000 in gas per year versus a $5000 car that costs $1000 in gas per year. Which one would you pick?
Except the chevy volt is in the same sub 30k category and they handily beat the pants off of the leaf in range. The leaf only gets a meager 149 miles per charge. The volt can go about 100 miles further and has the ability to charge faster.
? I own a leaf and get 215 miles per charge… Plus for most peoples the 149 on the base model is fine to go to work and back daily
2020 leaf sv plus owner here. Range is 212 officially but when my car is full charge it tells me 215 iirc
Why are you giving a question mark? The only leaf under $30k is the base with a 149 mile range. The sv plus with the 212 range is like $37k. That’s $10,000 more than a volt and still like 30 or 40 miles less range.
Also, yes, 149 would be enough for most people who never want a vehicleto take out of town, but you’re leaving out a huge amount of problems with a range like that. First, if you’re going to charge it every day it means you better own a house and garage to keep it in and charge, because charging stations for 45 minutes every other day or so would be terrible to deal with. Then if you live in a place where it gets really cold that mileage will be hacked down to about 110 miles. Plus, your battery will not last nearly as long if you have to use most of its range all the time and always have to charge it up to 100% full. Charging an EV up to just 80% or so capacity and recharging it at about 20% will literally double the lifespan of the battery. A small capacity EV like that won’t last nearly as long as one with a bigger battery.
I absolutely agree with you there. For consumer space this merger doesn’t make sense for Honda. For Nissan share holder, this is fantastic… Only thing I can think of is Nissan has some EV tech that Honda could use but that’s quite the stretch. Nissan actually jumped into EV relatively early but they didn’t iterate on it quickly enough to matter. Honda has been dragging their feet on EV and they both completely missed the boat on bridge tech offering like plug in hybrid. This merger isn’t going to do anything to fix that.
Since Nissan is now a low end brand and Honda is moving more towards premium side perhaps being together would cover the market segments better. The merger absolutely does nothing for the high end market though.
The one thing that I don’t know anything about is the commercial market domestically in Japan. Perhaps Nissan has good market share which Honda could gain from this merger. Maybe someone could chime in on this.
Public perception is also a factor. Even seeing collaborated cars like their EV Chevy thing takes away from Honda’s perception of reliability.