2001 Nissan Sentra, No Reserve on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Nissan announces 5-year/100,000-mile bumper-to-bumper warranty for commercial vehicles

Nissan is a relative new-kid when it comes to the commercial van market in the US, with its commercial vehicles division only introducing the first NV vans in February 2011. But Nissan isn't letting its newcomer status keep it from challenging the established players in the segment. The company's latest shot over competitors' bows is announcing that, starting for the 2014 model year, its NV Cargo, NV Passenger and NV200 Compact Cargo vans carry a best-in-class, five-year/100,000-mile bumper-to-bumper warranty. Their powertrain coverage also gets a 40,000-mile increase to five years/100,000 miles.
The new warranty is a huge leap over adversaries in the segment and should lure in some buyers looking for a longer term of coverage. The Mercedes-Benz Sprinter, Ram ProMaster, Ford Transit and Transit Connect all carry a three-year/36,000-mile bumper-to-bumper warranty. The Fords offer five years and 60,000 miles of powertrain coverage, while all of the others increase that to 100,000 miles. Until this announcement, Nissan had the standard thee years of coverage, as well.
The Japanese automaker is clearly hungry to grab a bigger piece of the commercial van pie. Its heavy-duty NV vans have a relatively small 5.3 percent market share in their segment as of May 2014, according to the company's figures, but the NV200 is doing better with a 19.4 percent share. The division as a whole is on the upswing, though, with sales up 88 percent so far in 2014. With just a few years under its belt, Nissan Commercial Vehicles seems unafraid to challenge the status quo in the segment. Let's see how buyers respond. Scroll down to read the full announcement about the new warranty.

Cadillac tops Tesla in Consumer Reports semi-automated driving test

General Motors' Cadillac outscored Tesla in a new ranking of partially automated driving systems tested by Consumer Reports and released on Thursday. The highly influential nonprofit organization, which tests and rates a variety of consumer products from appliances to vehicles, said it compared Cadillac's Super Cruise and Tesla's Autopilot with similar systems from Nissan and Volvo. Nissan's ProPilot Assist was ranked third and Volvo's Pilot Assist fourth. Consumer Reports said it has been testing partially automated driving systems for several years but elected to conduct a formal study intended for publication, because "we are at a tipping point where they are now going mainstream," according to Jake Fisher, director of auto testing. The organization said its tests, conducted on a private track and on public roads in Connecticut, were designed to measure the systems' ability to automatically control steering and speed in certain situations, while helping drivers pay attention and regain manual control of the vehicle when required. CR noted that any of these systems can increase driving risk if used in inappropriate situations, or if drivers become inattentive or over-reliant on them. While they can help relieve driver stress and fatigue, Consumer Reports said, the partially automated systems are "not intended to be self-driving features." The systems typically use cameras, radar and other sensors, as well as mapping data, to monitor location and traffic conditions and help keep a vehicle centered in the lane at a safe distance behind other cars. Each system has limitations. Cadillac's Super Cruise, for instance, only functions on divided highways that have been mapped by GM. In contrast, Tesla's Autopilot can be used even on small, curvy roads with poor lane markings, but "operates erratically in those situations," Consumer Reports said.The organization tested Super Cruise on the Cadillac CT6; Autopilot on the Tesla Model 3, Model X and Model S; ProPilot Assist on the Nissan Leaf and Infiniti QX50; and Pilot Assist on the Volvo XC40 and XC60. Consumer Reports said Cadillac's Super Cruise did "the best job of balancing high-tech capabilities with ensuring the car is operated safely and the driver is paying attention." Tesla's Autopilot was cited for its capability and ease of use, while Nissan's ProPilot Assist did a better job than Autopilot or Volvo's Pilot Assist in keeping drivers engaged.

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.