BEVs deals and information

pile-o-stone

thanks for the responses guys. Do we know if this is still an issue on the current leaf model (I'm thinking of the Leaf E+ specifically)?

Ah: I found some info here: https://cleantechnica.com/2019/01/05/nissan-leaf-rapidgate-mostly-solved-by-software-update/

Solarchaser

Tps = throttle position sensor.

And if its faulty it definitely should be replaced, as I've known a couple of older Hyundai's to go full throttle when pulling up at junctions.... bloody scary!

The supermarket fuel thing... I've heard this before.
Now while you could argue the likes of shell BP etc have probably better quality of fuel through additives, there is no way at all that one fill up with supermarket fuel would cause blocked injectors, that sounds far more like a kack of servicing, specifically not replacing the fuel filter

joefizz

almillar wrote: »

joefizz

Certainly not! If you're talking about electrical gremlins causing airbag lights, or ABS lights staying on, then these do still need to be repaired! It's the cost of repair, vs cost of just replacing the car, that I keep banging on about.

And Im not disagreeing with you on that, its one of the main points of my argument in that its a financial decision and if repairs were easier/cheaper then cars would be on the road longer. Cars would also be cleaner if regular maintenance on emissions was cheap/easy/readily available.

almillar wrote: »

The basic premise of the MOT is that if a car is fitted with something, it should be present and working. That's true of your door, and of an airbag.

I know! Enough people told me that after I complained about my car failing the mot for a shut door! ;-)

almillar wrote: »

Airbags have a light that tells you if there's an error. A non-working door or airbag would be serious in the event of a crash. Doesn't matter whether you ever use the door or not. But again, a dodgy door should be repaired, and shouldn't be a reason to scrap a car.

But again going back to your (and my) earlier point, an airbag light from the ecu can mean anything, theres no non-destructive way of actually testing an airbag and even then no way of knowing if it would work in an accident. My point, and indeed your point was that if it wasnt a sealed unit and easily accessible, it wouldnt be an off road issue, just trace the wiring and if its a fault in the ecu, just replace the chip/cap/heated resistor,whatever. They are mostly off the shelf components anyway, its (and I'll again emphasise we are talking about the same thing) ridiculous that a few quid worth of components force a car off the road prematurely.

almillar wrote: »

I agree with him, I do think you're underestimating peoples' utter lack of car knowledge.

What can I say, yeah I live in a bubble but Im rapidly coming to your conclusion, which again points to a failing in governance where people can be told that its thousands to repair a car (when it shouldnt be) yet they can hire one for 6 months for the cost of the fixed repair (again if thats true or not).

almillar wrote: »

I am arguing that any MOT failure is 'unsafe' on some level. Maybe you can drive home safely, maybe the car will fall apart if you crash. I'm sure none of us plan on crashing. Maybe you fail on the horn not working. That's 'safe' if you don't need to honk at anyone...

Again we agree, my horn is normally pressed twice per year, once a couple of days before the MOT and once during the MOT ;-)
Im not really disagreeing with you on the safety aspects but like most things the MOT has to be all things to all people (including the stupidest or the smartest doing stupid things).
I much prefer our system to GB because its isolated but again there should be some help for people post event or my preferred solution for preventative maintenance (that most of us were taught back in the day - well we had to!)

almillar wrote: »

So why are people putting cars through without the basic bulb check? Also, I very much doubt this is part of the 'cars being scrapped because it's cheaper to just PCP another one' - even a dealer would change a bulb for a fiver.

I know, its not as if there isnt enough information out there... ...then again if Id have checked my door beforehand... although it worked the year before ;-) I check it now ;-)

I doubt the bulb check as well but its indicative of lack of maintenance or maybe the roads up to MOT centres are just so bumpy it breaks bulbs on approach.
Its like everything else though, its just too easy to get credit to then hire a car and never worry about it (or even consider it).

almillar wrote: »

These have been available for Dells for as long as I can remember. A good reason to buy one. I hope that manual wasn't on paper!

Cheers, its been 7 years since I replaced it (well changed fans, memory, hd etc in the old one) so was wondering if it was a new thing, and no it wasnt on paper ;-)
Totally unrelated but I emailed a client a few days ago about sending through an equipment manual (fully expecting it to come by email), the postman knocked the door today and handed over half a tree. Seriously?

almillar wrote: »

A Tyre Pressure monitor? As in the sensor in the tyre? Be part of the solution, name and shame the manufacturer/garage - I'll vote with my feet and not buy that car.

No, throttle position sensor. Complete rip off - as above.

almillar wrote: »

Oh dear. Supermarket fuel has to meet stringent safety standards. If your car can't run on that, choose a different car. Might I suggest the short runs you mention are the real cause of the problem.

Combination of the above which ties into my points about people being previously sold diesels as 'green', running them on short journeys, with supermarket diesel not having (at times) the same additives to compensate for this etc etc. People who mainly do short journeys, in towns, on school runs etc should really be driving diesels but for years they were sold as the 'green' option and run in a manner which would cause future problems.

almillar wrote: »

So you changed the injectors, yes?

No, just cleaned them. but as above if I didnt know better with a 12 year old car I might think it terminal or just 'time to get rid'.

almillar wrote: »

Can we agree on 'potentially unsafe' and include emissions out of spec within that definition, since it affects the air we breathe?

Yes. I think we are arguing the same point with only slight differences in outcome. We both agree that a prime driver for keeping cars on the road in the uk is the cost/ease of repairs which is an economic issue (as well as manufacturing etc).
As with other countries, if stuff was easier/cheaper to fix the cars would on average be on the road a couple of years longer.
Going back to the air we breathe argument my whole argument was that my emissions over 6-10 years would be the same as the emissions in ordering a brand new car, so the choice is dump the emissions into the air now, this month or phase them in over 6 years and hope by the time 6 years have passed that the emissions levels for new EVs are a lot less than they are now. Granted the emissions wont be dumped on the streets of NI/ROI/GB over time but dumped in china/malaysia/south korea/italy/germany etc next month, so just poisoning someone elses kids, not ours..

joefizz

Solarchaser wrote: »

The supermarket fuel thing... I've heard this before.
Now while you could argue the likes of shell BP etc have probably better quality of fuel through additives, there is no way at all that one fill up with supermarket fuel would cause blocked injectors, that sounds far more like a kack of servicing, specifically not replacing the fuel filter

Fuel filter replaced 2 weeks before, thought Id got a bad filter at first or had left air trapped in it. Maybe the point is missed that the guys said that first thing, perhaps it was a bad batch and I wasnt the first person they had seen that week with the same problem.. (hint, I wasnt) They didnt mention "supermarket diesel" they mentioned a specific supermarket diesel which isnt anywhere close to where I live or indeed the shop.

EricMears

almillar wrote: »

EricMears:

Sorry about that. I told you some benefits of the lease for the Zoe, that people may not realise. You don't want a battery lease, so simply buy a Zoe 'i', where you own the battery. It'll cost more, but you have the choice.

A thread on speakev.com is suggesting that the Zoe battery lease scheme has been (or possibly is about to be) withdrawn.

JKenH

joefizz wrote: »

Fuel filter replaced 2 weeks before, thought Id got a bad filter at first or had left air trapped in it. Maybe the point is missed that the guys said that first thing, perhaps it was a bad batch and I wasnt the first person they had seen that week with the same problem.. (hint, I wasnt) They didnt mention "supermarket diesel" they mentioned a specific supermarket diesel which isnt anywhere close to where I live or indeed the shop.

I had a supermarket diesel problem. I filled my Rover 75 up at my local Morrison’s and set off on a caravan holiday. I thought the car felt a bit sluggish towing the van and when I got nearer my destination going uphill it was really struggling to make it. I filled it up with fresh fuel and the problem magically cleared. Back home again I was talking to my builder who was having problems with his van. I asked him where he filled it - yes, same place. Once he put diesel in from elsewhere it was fine. I contacted Morrison’s who denied there was a problem and I've never been back for diesel since.

EricMears

Martyn1981 wrote: »

Nissan have deployed a partial fix for 'rapidgate', in that they have raised the battery temp figure at which the computer will reduce the rapid charge rate.

But that's not really a fix, just a hope, by Nissan, that the original temp limit they were using was too conservative. The obvious fear though is that this 'fix' will result in greater battery degradation.

As you point out, the real problem here is the lack of active cooling, something Nissan has received massive criticism over.

I've had the software update and have managed three rapid charges in a day without undue slowing.

I should of course point out that the slowing probably only happened when people tried to top their battery right up to 100% on a rapid charger. Best practice is (and always was) to stop charging at 90% (or preferably lower).

I agree that lack of active battery cooling (or heating in cold weather) is a definite disadvantage of the Nissan battery system.

Solarchaser

Ahh yes, we have all had dodgy fuel from somewhere.
For me it was a Texaco garage, they denied there was a problem, but I heard a couple of days later they had their tanks inspected due to a flood of complaints (pardon the pun) and the deisel was 50% water.
I've also not been back to that one.

almillar

Tps = throttle position sensor.

No, throttle position sensor. Complete rip off - as above.

OK, well that still sounds expensive. But it replaces a throttle cable, which could also fail, and it will add features like 'modes' and ultimately, better economy. Not planned obselesence in my book.

But again going back to your (and my) earlier point, an airbag light from the ecu can mean anything, theres no non-destructive way of actually testing an airbag and even then no way of knowing if it would work in an accident

So either the system thinks the airbag is faulty (replace the airbag) or the system, a sensor or whatever, is faulty. This will require work, which will cost money. It will cost more money than it used to, because cars didn't used to have airbags. Should we go back to those days? Is it manufacturers trying to make running a car more expensive, or just safety?

They are mostly off the shelf components anyway, its (and I'll again emphasise we are talking about the same thing) ridiculous that a few quid worth of components force a car off the road prematurely.

Yes, but a numpty working on their own car could explode an airbag in their face, so it might be worth paying for specialist attention, in this particular, an other cases.

Again we agree, my horn is normally pressed twice per year, once a couple of days before the MOT and once during the MOT ;-)

About twice a week for me!

I know, its not as if there isnt enough information out there... ...then again if Id have checked my door beforehand... although it worked the year before ;-) I check it now ;-)

I doubt the bulb check as well but its indicative of lack of maintenance or maybe the roads up to MOT centres are just so bumpy it breaks bulbs on approach.
Its like everything else though, its just too easy to get credit to then hire a car and never worry about it (or even consider it).

Again, you've been arguing that expensive repairs following MOT is putting 'good' cars off the road. Bulbs and other simple inexpensive checks clearly aren't part of that. Nobody is going and getting that cheap credit on a lovely new car because replacing a bald tyre would cost more than their car's worth. Cars fail for expensive and cheap reasons. But a fail's a fail.

Combination of the above which ties into my points about people being previously sold diesels as 'green', running them on short journeys, with supermarket diesel not having (at times) the same additives to compensate for this etc etc. People who mainly do short journeys, in towns, on school runs etc should really be driving diesels but for years they were sold as the 'green' option and run in a manner which would cause future problems.

Agreed in part, but they were never sold by manufacturers as being suitable for short journeys. No ICE is. Diesel especially isn't. If you tell me about the odd rogue salesman, fine, but not the industry as a whole. I remember my dad buying one and having to sign something saying he'd been warned that petrol may be more suitable! Consumers have a resonsibility to look beyond the headline MPG figure, which they'll never get on a short run. The fuel isn't the problem (with clogs), usage is.

No, just cleaned them. but as above if I didnt know better with a 12 year old car I might think it terminal or just 'time to get rid'.

Good stuff. I was making sure you didn't run and change the car ;-)

EricMears:

A thread on speakev.com is suggesting that the Zoe battery lease scheme has been (or possibly is about to be) withdrawn.

Yep, at launch at least, it doesn't seem to be available. But you were talking earlier like you were being forced to lease, I pointed out that you had a choice. Most people chose the lease option for Zoe 1. Proof? Find a Zoe 'i' (battery owned) for sale amongst all the 'normal' (battery leased) Zoes.

JKenH

I had a supermarket diesel problem. I filled my Rover 75 up at my local Morrison’s and set off on a caravan holiday. I thought the car felt a bit sluggish towing the van and when I got nearer my destination going uphill it was really struggling to make it. I filled it up with fresh fuel and the problem magically cleared. Back home again I was talking to my builder who was having problems with his van. I asked him where he filled it - yes, same place. Once he put diesel in from elsewhere it was fine. I contacted Morrison’s who denied there was a problem and I've never been back for diesel since.

That's a (possible) contamination problem at one STATION, not brand. We were talking about running a car for years and injectors, DPFs etc getting clogged.

joefizz

almillar wrote: »

OK, well that still sounds expensive. But it replaces a throttle cable, which could also fail, and it will add features like 'modes' and ultimately, better economy. Not planned obselesence in my book.

Throttle cables break, fail safe. TPS can fail deadly (stuck on). Ive had a throttle cable break and it was a cheap easy fix (new cable). Some TPS can just be opened with a screwdriver/pozi and have components replaced. Some manufacturers can charge up to a grand... They all should be opened and replaced easily.
If they were opened up and replaced easily it would then be just a service item and pre-emptive replacement could occur well in advance of the mtbf. Apply that rule to everything and its design and all of our recent comments are null and void.
Most redesigns are either fault fixes or cost reductions and any of the above isnt either, making something easily serviceable makes it more expensive.

almillar wrote: »

So either the system thinks the airbag is faulty (replace the airbag) or the system, a sensor or whatever, is faulty. This will require work, which will cost money. It will cost more money than it used to, because cars didn't used to have airbags. Should we go back to those days? Is it manufacturers trying to make running a car more expensive, or just safety?

Cars didnt used to have airbags? I cant remember that far back ;-)
The safety argument is a null one because Im not talking about removing any of this, just making it serviceable with a common interface.

I dont attribute to malice what can be attributed to stupidity/bad design but with the above TPS example, canbus lighting, dpf/egr/adblue, turbos on small diesels requiring specialist oils etc, cars have been made more complicated to meet emissions which should be no bad thing and Im not arguing against that. What I am arguing against is how many of these are sealed units and expensive to replace when they shouldnt be. With more popular models (with my previous turbo example, what was once a throw away the car repair is now the same price as an annual service at a dealer - minus labour.....will get on to that).
If the overall goal was to reduce emissions and not sell new cars then part of the MOT for diesels could include DPF refresh or retrofitting dpfs/egrs/adblue to older cars and subsidise that in parallel with new car developments. 3rd parties are producing retro fit DPFs (looked at it myself for my old camper) for london zone compliance (again economic thing and worthwhile if you have a small van) so why cant an easily serviceable set of retro fit measures be developed and subsidised by government and included as part of annual emissions testing/checking. Would pretty much instantly reduce emissions and prolong lifetimes until such time that lower emissions replacements came along.
Taking my old camper as an example, its 1997 diesel and to reduce emissions I can retro add a dpf for between 100 and 300 quid (used or new) next time Im renewing the exhaust, or add in an egr or add in adblue at more expense. I could even swap the engine out for a reconditioned lower emissions one for about a grand not including labour (wheeler dealers style). Apart from the actual cost and time to do it, it needs vehicle approval and may count as a modification on my insurance!
Add in no emissions testing here and without vehicle approval I couldnt get lower tax rates, so no benefit to me (although may do the dpf thing anyway).
No reason why this couldnt be part of some scheme (well apart from usual govt waste and costing 3-4x as much as it would cost from a local garage).
There are ways and means that dont involve new cars and new mot rules which will fail a car for harming the environment (cant remember the exact phraseology) without putting in a decent recourse arent solving the problem but making it worse.
You would nearly think the rules were put in place to sell more cars....

almillar wrote: »

Yes, but a numpty working on their own car could explode an airbag in their face, so it might be worth paying for specialist attention, in this particular, an other cases.

Airbags scare the life out of me when working on cars but in the main its the problem with the ecu itself or just the wiring. As time has passed things like raspberry pis and arduino have become cheaper and readily available,good design with proper interfaces etc and charging for firmware licenses instead of a sealed lump of kit would bring the costs down.
Again that doesnt sell new cars though.

almillar wrote: »

Again, you've been arguing that expensive repairs following MOT is putting 'good' cars off the road. Bulbs and other simple inexpensive checks clearly aren't part of that. Nobody is going and getting that cheap credit on a lovely new car because replacing a bald tyre would cost more than their car's worth. Cars fail for expensive and cheap reasons. But a fail's a fail.

As we have both discussed, some failures can be expensive and force perfectly good cars off the road, increasingly as a result of danger to the environment rather than self or other road users.
Last summer I spent a couple of weeks welding parts of the floorpan in my 19 year old car which agreed for most cars is a beyond economic repair and quite rightly without it an mot fail for being dangerous. The previous MOT tester said Id probably get another year or two out of it before it became a problem. MOT test centres over here are a mine of information as they know the common problems with certain vehicles and Ive found most are happy to point you in the right direction with preventative maintenance.
The fact that bump starting one time fried a voltage regulator or capacitor in a my sealed airbag ecu is also an mot fail and for most people a permanent off the road condition as they dont make them any more.
As far as the law goes they are both equally scrappable failures, when one could be a simple 10 or 20 quid fix (even say 100 throwing in an auto electrician doing it for you). I wouldnt advocate driving around in a car with dodgy airbags any more than I would in one with holes in the floorpan. As I mentioned in my previous post, I tested my airbag system and they would activate in the event of an accident, just the data comms between the airbag ecu and main ecu was awry somewhere inside the sealed ecu unit.



Low mileage diesels, make the DPF as a serviceable cheap item. Modifying them now or even looking like their modified is an MOT fail.

almillar wrote: »

Agreed in part, but they were never sold by manufacturers as being suitable for short journeys. No ICE is. Diesel especially isn't. If you tell me about the odd rogue salesman, fine, but not the industry as a whole. I remember my dad buying one and having to sign something saying he'd been warned that petrol may be more suitable! Consumers have a resonsibility to look beyond the headline MPG figure, which they'll never get on a short run. The fuel isn't the problem (with clogs), usage is.

Have a look at the top gear video I posted. Remember back to when Gordon Brown promoted diesels as the clean alternative. No mention of how they were to be run back then (or since with PCP deals). I certainly didnt have to sign anything 12 years ago for my diesel when I ordered it, havent heard of anyone since then either.
I sometimes walk past a school near here and would be surprised if any of the mums in small diesels sitting with their engines running know much about it either...

We come back to people and economics again though.

If its cheap enough and shiny shiny then the majority of people will go for it. Tell them its clean diesel or clean ev or whatever but overall its economics and 'prestige' factor.