Nissan XE vs SV and PCP or not PCP

Marcusm

Deleted User wrote: »

Ireland produces enough food to feed 8 times our population, this in my view isn't sustainable, then we export this food half way around the world.

It's all mental. Farming is more about making money than feeding people, I know if they don't make money then they won't farm. it's a vicious circle !

I vote we invest this billions into R&D into Molten Salt Thorium Reactors, L.F.T.R

The world has thousands of years worth of clean energy screaming for us to use it.

Different countries have different natural strengths; Ireland's population density is low due to historic reasons (famine and continual emigration of fecund citizens) while it's ability to nurture food - both plant and flesh - is a strength to be exploited. We can't simply grow enough to eat anymore than people in less fertile areas (eg Saudi) can't grow enough but have other produce.

Marcusm

Marcusm wrote: »

And this misallocation of pricing is not for the benefit of an informed sensible purchaser! It supports lazy activity and getting on the renewal of a new PCP rather than a rational decision.

What are you talking about "lazy activity" ?

Marcusm

Deleted User wrote: »

What are you talking about "lazy activity" ?

The PCP ends up like a drug addiction; each 3 years the "lazy" will simply roll into a new model rather than considering their options. This is further copper bottomed by the "equity" in the car which is easier to access through the same marque/dealer model. All the while, the actual finance provided to the customer is less than it is asserted to be.

Marcusm

Marcusm wrote: »

The PCP ends up like a drug addiction; each 3 years the "lazy" will simply roll into a new model rather than considering their options. This is further copper bottomed by the "equity" in the car which is easier to access through the same marque/dealer model. All the while, the actual finance provided to the customer is less than it is asserted to be.

Well since I don't intend to keep the Leaf I don't need traditional finance or a bank loan.

My monthly payments are significantly less because I am not paying back based on the full amount of the car I don't want to own.

PCP gives you 3 years to think about whether you want to keep the car or not.

I see no problem if someone doesn't want to keep the car by going for PCP.

The danger here is that people who otherwise can't afford traditional means of finance would go on PCP thinking only about lower monthly payments and not thinking about the balloon at the end or the fact PCP is designed to keep you coming back.

But as an alternative to the traditional source of finance, PCP offers a really good alternative.

Marcusm

Deleted User wrote: »

The danger here is that people who otherwise can't afford traditional means of finance would go on PCP thinking only about lower monthly payments and not thinking about the balloon at the end or the fact PCP is designed to keep you coming back.
.

this plus those who cannot be bothered to budget properly or consider their options are precisely what I mean by lazy activity.

Marcusm

Marcusm wrote: »

this plus those who cannot be bothered to budget properly or consider their options are precisely what I mean by lazy activity.

Yeah, people do need to factor in needing a deposit or paying for excess mileage.

Quiet a lot of people don't really add up the cost of buying a new car then throwing petrol/diesel into the equation.

If they could see their monthly car payment + fuel on paper they might think twice.

fm

Deleted User wrote: »

The Higher the GFV the more likely someone is to go to a new contract by not wanting to pay xxxx on the car they've driven for 3 years which would go a long way towards paying for a new car.

The Lower the GFMV the more likely you might think about buying the car and maybe the higher GFMV in the Leaf might mean Nissan are predicting a high resale value because they want you to buy another car so they is going to be value in the car and if you think you're going to go well over the mileage then you'd be better to hop into a new car in 2 years if you can rather than fay a good few K in mileage penalties, or just buy the car at the end.

Nissan would be taking a big risk though if they are trying to predict higher resale values.I suppose the higher the gfmv can be a good thing for customers as they have less in payments to make so less interest costs

Lantus

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Yeah, people do need to factor in needing a deposit or paying for excess mileage.

Quiet a lot of people don't really add up the cost of buying a new car then throwing petrol/diesel into the equation.

If they could see their monthly car payment + fuel on paper they might think twice.

Total cost analysis is essential. Take the Skoda fabia for example which is a much better comparison than an Octavia. You can get this on PCP for 200-250 per month with very little deposit and do a fairly long daily commute plus tax and fuel and it will be cheaper than just a leaf on its own before tax and elec.

All cars are depreciating assets. They are not designed to last as long as we want to imagine. Manufacturers make no money from cars that last decades with modular components to allow for upgrade.

PCP offers a lit of benefits for consumers. They get to drive new, reliable cars with virtually no risk of large garage repair bills and enjoy low tax and fuel costs with a set monthly payment and the knowledge that after three years they get another new car. For a lot of people if you rely on car to drive a long way to work or pick up kids that is worth a lot. It makes life really easy.

Its got a lit more in common with mobile phones where people get contracts and pay a set fee knowing they will upgrade in two years to get the latest phone and start a new contract.

I have an old car and I've looked it up and its worth about 800quid. Not much benefit when I need to get a replacement. As I now have x kids and a long commute the idea of unpredictable massive garage bills is undesirable on an asset that has no real value long term.

The Fabia is not comparable to the leaf , the leaf motor is much more powerful despite it's 104 Hp rating, it;s bigger and probably better equipped.

Anyone can go buy a 14-15 K Hyundai I10 if you want cheap and potter about, or buy a 2nd hand leaf, the leaf will be a far better car and it's bigger.

You can buy cheap but it's not a like for like comparison.

The leaf has a lot of power, much more than the 1.4 TDI or 1.2 TFSI.

You can buy a manual car if you want for 16 k and spend the rest on petrol, the 6 K difference between that and the basic leaf would drive some people for years.

You can buy cheap but some people want more.

The Leaf can be got cheap on PCP also if you don't do mad mileage.

Lantus

[Deleted User] wrote: »

The Fabia is not comparable to the leaf , the leaf motor is much more powerful despite it's 104 Hp rating, it;s bigger and probably better equipped.

Anyone can go buy a 14-15 K Hyundai I10 if you want cheap and potter about, or buy a 2nd hand leaf, the leaf will be a far better car and it's bigger.

You can buy cheap but it's not a like for like comparison.

The leaf has a lot of power, much more than the 1.4 TDI or 1.2 TFSI.

You can buy a manual car if you want for 16 k and spend the rest on petrol, the 6 K difference between that and the basic leaf would drive some people for years.

You can buy cheap but some people want more.

The Leaf can be got cheap on PCP also if you don't do mad mileage.

Its hard to compare any two cars but the leaf is in the mid size compact class. Its about the same size accordingley (fabia boot would be bigger!)

Leaf is an expensive car alright and its subsidised as well before a consumer gets to it. Its a very nice car and drive but people who buy 7 series BMWs would view a leaf as cheap trash so its all relative! I have driven a lot of cars recently including Dacia's which I thought were amazing to drive.

At the end of day you won't get people in leafs on pure economics just yet as they can drive cheaper cars. Unless they are currently driving more expensive cars like new golfs at which point it becomes a better prospect.

I compared over a dozen cars on total costs over three years and I'm happy that the new car I picked is the cheapest and a class beater and its petrol! I hope in future to go elec and the next gen batteries will change motoring, but not as much as autonomous cars.

samih

Lantus wrote: »

Its hard to compare any two cars but the leaf is in the mid size compact class. Its about the same size accordingley (fabia boot would be bigger!)

Is Fabia interior really the same size as Golf, Focus, Pulsar etc. etc. with an addition of a bigger boot? According to wikipedia that is not the case but if you are right Skoda engineers did a great job in packaging:

Fabia: Wheelbase 2,470 m Length 3,992 mm
Leaf: Wheelbase 2,700 mm Length 4,445 mm
Golf: Wheelbase 2,637 mm Length 4,255 mm

Edit. Actually the Leaf wheelbase is only 3 mm shorter than my previous car, a SAAB 9-5 (Wheelbase 2703 mm). No wonder that the interior is quite spacious even compared to it.

Lantus

samih wrote: »

Is Fabia interior really the same size as Golf, Focus, Pulsar etc. etc. with an addition of a bigger boot? According to wikipedia that is not the case but if you are right Skoda engineers did a great job in packaging:

Fabia: Wheelbase 2,470 m Length 3,992 mm
Leaf: Wheelbase 2,700 mm Length 4,445 mm
Golf: Wheelbase 2,637 mm Length 4,255 mm

Edit. Actually the Leaf wheelbase is only 3 mm shorter than my previous car, a SAAB 9-5 (Wheelbase 2703 mm). No wonder that the interior is quite spacious even compared to it.

Interior no and never claimed it was. Did think boot was bigger than leaf but not on hatch it seems after checking. To me all these cars are very similar. If you want a big boot as a priority there are lots if cars that offer bundles if space. No need to compromise with any if the above. Just get the Octavia!

Leaf interior is very good especially the rear I thought anyway. Economics driven by need. If I needed to transport 4 people every day then rear space would be critical but its a blue moon anyone except an under 5 gets in the back. Vast majority of commuters travel alone.

samih

The Leaf appears much smaller than it is due to the shape of it. It looks like a supermini size car from the distance but it's an optical illusion due to the extra height the under floor battery pack requires. Took me a while to figure that out. It's a good bit bigger car than a Golf.

And yeah, the boot is quite good as the battery pack doesn't extend past the base of the rear seat. The only compromise really is the toe room for the rear seat passengers as there is very little space between the floor and the front seats. The rear seat is a good bit higher than the fronts so visibility is good from the back.

nokia69

Nissan need to put the motor and controller of the Leaf between the wheels like the Model S

then they can have storage in the front as well as the back

cros13

nokia69 wrote: »

Nissan need to put the motor and controller of the Leaf between the wheels like the Model S

then they can have storage in the front as well as the back

They stacked up the inverter, motor and charger because it allowed them to fit the whole assembly using the same equipment that fits engines on existing lines for ICE vehicles.

That allows them a lot of production flexibility and reduced tooling costs.

steelboots

I was watching a youtube video of someone taking the "engine" apart from a crashed one, and it consisted on 3 layers from top to bottom 1) The charging unit 2) The inverter 3) The motor. Couldn't help but think the charging unit and inverter could have been kept lower and there by making space up front.

It would have been nice to have space up front for the cable and other bits and bobs...

It would mean a new chassis, and it would alter production too much but it would be worth it imo.

From looking at the pics of the 60 Kwh it looks like assembly will be pretty much the same for Leaf II, it will have a different chassis but I doubt it will change a lot.

steelboots

steelboots wrote: »

I was watching a youtube video of someone taking the "engine" apart from a crashed one, and it consisted on 3 layers from top to bottom 1) The charging unit 2) The inverter 3) The motor. Couldn't help but think the charging unit and inverter could have been kept lower and there by making space up front.

It would have been nice to have space up front for the cable and other bits and bobs...

It was done that way to keep production costs low by making it on the same assembly line as the petrol and diesel cars, the only thing different is installing the battery.

BoatMad

Just a comment to several posters.

Building equity in a car by having an arbitrarily low GMFV is great for the dealer as it encourages unthinking re purchase.

But at 7.9 % you are funding that equity in a very expensive way, there is no free lunch. For example, simply putting the difference aside over the three years would generate equity at zero finance.

I notice from my latest quote , the SV , cold pack 16 MY , 6kwh charger 30 kWh battery , is now just under 25k and that's INCLUDES. 4K scrapage and the GMFV has been lowered by nearly 1000 euros from early November ( when 16 pricing was released )

Again Nissan are " forcing " you into lower GMFV PCPS because it aids re-purchase. ( and let's the dealer price 2nd hands lower too ) there is obviously a concern in Nissan Ireland then 2nd leafs are too expensive as a result of higher GMFV and that's causing 2nd hand resale issues.

Furthermore , there is an incredible difference in the penalty of taking a lower mileage pcp and accepting the 10 cents a km penalty over going for a larger mileage pcp. The former is twice as expensive as the later for no good reason.

All in all a very expensive car on a expensive finance deal.

PCP is designed for people who like to change their car every 3 years and it's a pretty good alternative to traditional bank loan or finance.

At the time last January the interest on a bank loan or finance wasn't cheaper and I intend to get a new car in 2018 so it made even more sense for me.

The lower GFMV does suggest that they have it set up that you're guaranteed to have a larger deposit in 3 years which is good for you if you intend to change in 3 years.

The higher GFMV means you're also unlikely to pay the lump sum and change but it's also designed that you have a deposit at the end or what's the point ?

Anyone who fears PCP can just take out a bank loan or go with normal finance over 5 years and trade in in 3 or pay off sooner if you wish, chances are the interest will be far higher than PCP over the 3 years.

PCP works for me because the payments are about 300 Euro's less than bank loan of finance and interest at the time wasn't different to bank loan or finance so it made little sense for me to go the traditional route since I'm not keeping the car and my monthly payments are much lower.

Sounds to me like you should have saved up and waited until 2018 for the 300-350 Km Leaf.

If someone wants to have the 3 years to think if they want to keep the car or not then all they have to do is add the deposit, and the monthly payments + the GFMV and that is the total cost to buy, then compare to bank loan or finance and this is what I did last year, PCP worked out about the same , so the benefits of bank loan or finance made even less sense for me last January.

In other words, PCP wasn't more expensive to buy out the car by paying the balloon, the only difference is that to re-finance the balloon could work out more expensive or maybe it won't if the interest is cheaper at that end of the contract.