Depowering Not Required: Nissan Leaf safer than Chevy Volt
Smarter battery management
But is the Volt really dangerous?
One day you are out driving your gas-guzzler and WHAM, some jerk blows a stop light and t-bones your ride. A total loss, including the full tank of gasoline that now has to be emptied to prevent fires.
Well, that’s no different than a Chevy Volt that has to be depowered after a crash to ensure that a fire doesn’t eventually break out, probably many days or even weeks after the crash.
Not an unreasonable protocol, right? Just like taking the gas out of a guzzler. Still, such depowering is never required following a Nissan Leaf crash.
“The Leaf is designed with battery safety systems that disconnect the high voltage from the vehicle in a severe crash,” claimed the company recently.
Nevertheless, both plug-ins are safe, although it appears that Nissan did make maintaining battery safety following a severe crash a little more safe than GM. Still, the Volt is just as safe as any conventional car.
I don’t think the problem with the Volt is indicative of anything other than the fact that it’s a new technology that is going to have kinks that need to be addressed.
for many, many years, ya’ll may remember the “problem” we had with poor placement of gasoline tanks that cause many horrible collision fires… and it took years to figure out how to better place the tank.
laminated glass eventually solved the problem of people being beheaded when thrust into the windshield…
remember the automatic seat belts that wrapped around you when you got in… and actually trapped people in wrecks.
side door reinforcement….. curtain air bags…
etc, etc, etc
I just don’t see the Volt problem as anything more than a problem that needs to be addressed …and will be….
and I still think Chevy got it “right” on range + ICE engine backup….
the only real problem is the price is wrong.
if that car cost 20K… they’d give the Prius a real run for the money – pun intended.
Yes. The Volt earned the 5 star rating before the fires…… and the Volt KEPT its 5 star even after the NTHSA learned of the fires. THAT is what I said.
And you can pretty much guarantee the Volt will be rated 5 star after the NTHSA investigation is complete and any remedies have been developed…
The biggest risk right now with the Volt is the risk of “damage to my eardrums” from hearing all the repeated mis-information from Nathan and those like him.
And it won’t end there….. Once GM resolves this issue, Nathan and others with their own “biased” opinion of the Volt will simply find something else to complain about.
And an article from April showing that the Volt earned “top scores” in crash tests, well before fires.
http://money.cnn.com/2011/04/26/news/companies/leaf_volt_crash_tests/index.htm
A five-star rated vehicle can still have a defect that makes it less safe than other vehicles, serious enough to lead to a recall. The five star rating means that in a handful of controlled impact tests, the vehicle protected the occupants from the crash forces very well. Other issues (driver controls, pedal placement, wet-weather handling – even factory windshield wiper choices) can make a vehicle more or less safe, despite the crash ratings. A battery catching fire (yes, 75% of the time) does in my opinion make the vehicle less safe than others. I believe the Volt will be recalled.
You mention that the Volt received the rating despite the fire – that is not true. The first Volt caught fire in June, “three weeks after a [May 12] side impact crash test” according to the NHTSA. The Volt was awarded the five star rating prior to the fire, as can be confirmed in articles available June 3, 2011:
http://money.cnn.com/2011/06/03/autos/nhtsa_volt_five_star/index.htm
That said, the recall will not impact the five star rating as the rating primarily determines the ability of the passengers to survive the immediate impact.
75% will catch fire according to your data?
That sounds like conservative math……From the same folks that determined each Volt cost $250,000 in subsidies, and you can reduce the deficit by lowering taxes……
If you want to read NHTSA data, read the data that gives the Volt a 5 start crash rating even with the knowledge of the fires in testing.
How can you know the Volt is just as safe??? Because it has a 5 star rating….
A 5 star rating DOES mean the vehicle is safer than other vehicles that did not receive a 5 star rating.
I always love name calling – shows you cant defend yourself with logic. The point is that 75% of Volt batteries tested have “thermal events” following severe side impacts upon rotation – regardless of how long after the accident the vehicle is rotated. If a Volt is hit on the side and rolls over, there appears to be a strong chance it will catch fire immediately.
“Agitating electrolytes” and “stirring up” stored energy, hmmm?
Nathan – Glad to read yet another poster who only scans the headlines and doesn’t bother reading the body of the articles. You nimrod.
First, the first two Volt fires, as repeatedly reported, occurred weeks after the incidents. The first was a true crash, the second was lab testing.
The cars were placed in parking lots. No one was injured. The batteries in neither car was drained as a safety precaution (as you would do with a standard gas tank) because GM “forgot” to tell anyone this would have to be standard safety protocol. The stored energy built to the point a fire started. Just like if you leave gas in a hot, damaged tank, it will leak and cause a fire or “pop” the tank and cause a fire. Get it, fetus fart? Stored energy is kinetic, not static. It NEEDS to be used.
The third fire was also a lab test and in THAT situation the battery was immediately rotated after the crash and a fire began. So, rotating the battery is what started the immediate fire, agitating the electrolyte and “stirring up” the stored energy.
And since when is rotating batteries on “conventional vehicles” after a crash standard operating procedure? Show me one damn tow company that does that, chucklehead. Besides, as a comparison, it would be more accurate to suggest the gas tank in a “conventional vehicle” would be rotated after an accident, since that’s where the energy is stored. And we both know that ain’t gonna happen.
Dakky is right that the Volt is just as safe as an ICE vehicle. If you smash into it, you’re gonna get broken bits all around. How those bits get handled is supposed to be revealed by the manufacturer. The fault here lies with GM and their passive/aggressive reistance to EV tech. At least, EV tech here in the states.
Nathan, I would suggest reading a little more about such topics before spouting off about them. Good lord, man! I’ve considered calling you some kind of retard, if it weren’t insulting to the other retards…
You make such absurd, biased statements – how can you possibly say “Still, the Volt is just as safe as any conventional car.” Nobody know that… What we know for sure is that two of the three Volt batteries tested in simulated crashes last month had “thermal events” – one right away. That means that based on today’s data, perhaps 25% of Volts run through severe side impacts catch fire immediately and 75% will eventually. That doesn’t sound ‘as safe as any conventional car to me.’
The delay in burning appears to come from the fact that some of the batteries were not rotated (a test done on conventional vehicles to check for post-accident leaks) until much later and had “thermal events” immediately following rotation. Recent articles have stated that some in the NHTSA believe the welds in the battery cause the shorting, not the coolant as GM has stated.
http://www.newsinferno.com/defective-products/chevy-volt-investigation-focused-on-welds/34558
We are working with a very small sample at this point, but is it possible that 5% or 10% of Volts involved in severe side impacts catch fire immediately? How about 1%? If so, is that still safer than a conventional car?
I agree on the Honda Battery…. Air cooling is one of many deficiencies with that battery.
I saw on the news last night a story about a hero that rescued someone from a Ford F-150 that caught fire immediately after colliding with another vehicle. YES. Ford F-150′s are a bigger fire risk than a Chevy Volt or a Nissan Leaf.
Yeah, it will be interesting to see long term if air cooled batteries offer serious disadvantages in hot climates in general. Honestly, I think Honda had multiple issues with its entire battery pack beyond just bms issues and bad code.
Likewise different chemistries have different heat tendencies. so the right chemistry could be stable with air cooling even in extremely hot climates.
nevertheless, i think its important to reinforce that GM’s de-powering protocol is less of a danger than dealing with gasoline after a severe crash as long as everyone is properly educated.
It’s not just the protective case that reduces the risk with the Leaf battery.
The main reason for the reduced risk with the Leaf battery is that the Leaf battery is “air cooled”, not liquid cooled.
No liquid coolant, means no risk of fire from a coolant leak.
But for me, living in Arizona, not having a liquid cooling system is a bad thing. It increases the risk of having battery durability issues.
I experienced battery durability issues with my Honda Civic Hybrid, which also has an air cooled battery system. One hot summer in Arizona, and my HCH II battery performance fell way off. I told myself I would never by another hybrid or EV unless it had a liquid cooling system for the battery.
Liquid cooling was one factor in my decision to purchase the Volt. Even if I had decided to go with a 100% EV, I still would not have bought a Leaf, because of the lack of a liquid cooling system. I would have waited for the Ford Focus EV, which has a liquid cooling system.