1990 Nissan 300zx on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Nissan won't downsize the next Armada

The Nissan Armada is aptly named, because in relative automotive terms, it's not just the size of a ship - it's the size of a whole fleet. And that, according to reports, isn't about to change.
While many of the larger SUVs on the market are gradually being phased out or replaced by smaller crossovers, Nissan apparently plans on keeping the Armada right where it is. And that means a large, truck-based, eight-passenger colossus, because there are buyers out there who expect no less and Nissan isn't about to lose them to the likes of the Toyota Sequoia, Ford Expedition and Lincoln Navigator, or a General Motors lineup that includes the Chevy Suburban and Tahoe, GMC Yukon and Cadillac Escalade.
That doesn't mean that the next Armada - which Edmunds expects will arrive in 2015 or 2016 - will be immune to constricting environmental regulations, so Nissan will have to get creative. A vehicle the size of the Armada has all the aerodynamic efficiency of the side of a barn, but Nissan is reportedly aiming to streamline that in order to boost efficiency, for starters.

2015 Nissan GT-R updated with new lights, more refined ride

The Nismo version of Nissan's high-tech supercar may be getting most of the headlines today, but we shouldn't forget that the car on which it's based, the garden-variety GT-R, has been significantly updated for 2015, as well.
What Nissan engineers focused on for the new model year was making the GT-R a more well-rounded GT car. That means dialing some more compliance into the car's very firm suspension for a more comfortable ride, as well as lightening up the steering at low speeds to make urban maneuvering easier. The braking calibration has also been changed to be more linear and smooth when slowing from normal, everyday speeds. Does this mean the GT-R has gone soft? We'll reserve judgment until we drive it, but Nissan claims the new refinements giving the car "multi-dimensional performance."
The GT-R also gets new lighting technology for 2015, including multi-LED headlights that lend the car a new light signature at night, and the LED taillight rings are now complete circles instead of rings of dots. The headlights are also now controlled by an Adaptive Front Lighting System, which sounds similar to other systems that aim light where the car is being turned, but Nissan's system adjusts the angle of the lights depending on vehicle speed - at higher speeds the lights are angled to project their illumination further.

DC fast charging not as damaging to EV batteries as expected

As convenient as DC fast charging is, there have been lots of warnings that repeated dumping of so many electrons into an electric vehicle's battery pack in such a short time would reduce the battery's life. While everyone agrees that DC fast charging does have some effect on battery life, it may not be as bad as previously expected. Over on SimanaitisSays, Dennis Simanaitis, writes about a recent presentation by Matt Shirk of the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) called DC Fast, Wireless, And Conductive Charging Evaluation Projects (PDF) that describes an ongoing test of four 2012 Nissan Leaf EVs that are being charged in two pairs of two. One pair only recharges from 50-kW DC fast chargers, which the other two sip from 3.3-kW Level 2 chargers exclusively. Otherwise, the cars are operated pretty much the same: climate is automatically set to 72 degrees, are driven on public roads around Phoenix, AZ and have the same set of dedicated drivers is rotated through the four cars. "Degradation depends more on the miles traveled than on the nature of recharging." What's most interesting are the charts on page seven of Shirk's presentation (click the image above to enlarge), which show the energy capacity of each of the four vehicles. When they were new, the four batteries were each tested to measure their energy capacity and given a 0 capacity loss baseline. They were then tested at 10,000, 20,000, 30,000 and 40,000 miles, and at each point, the DC-only EVs had roughly the same amount of battery loss as the Level 2 test subjects. The DC cars did lose a bit more at each test, but only around a 25-percent overall loss after 40k, compared to 23 percent for the Level 2 cars. Simanaitis' takeaway is that, "INL data suggest that the amount of degradation depends more on the miles traveled than on the nature of recharging." The tests are part of the INLs' Advanced Vehicle Testing Activity work and a final report is forthcoming. These initial numbers from IPL do mesh with other research into DC fast charging, though. Mitsubishi said daily fast charging wouldn't really hurt the battery in the i-MiEV and MIT tests of a Fisker Karma battery showed just 10-percent loss over 1,500 rapid charge-discharge cycles.