DougWantsALeaf
Well-known member
Was curious if anyone with a 2013 had experienced a capacity bar loss yet. Curious if the updated batteries were any more resistant to degradation (except for using the 80% mode).
General consensus is that we can't tell for sure yet. Some 2013s are reporting very high Ahr readings while others are reporting quite low readings. Mine started low. I haven't noticed dropping range for sure, but the Ahr reading indicates I'm more than 1/2 way to losing a bar already after 4 months. But the weather has turned cooler so I expect degradation to slow down.DougWantsALeaf said:Was curious if anyone with a 2013 had experienced a capacity bar loss yet. Curious if the updated batteries were any more resistant to degradation (except for using the 80% mode).
jstack6 said:The lizard battery coming out in April 2014 should be even better. Nissan is working hard to get better and better.
DougWantsALeaf said:Was curious if anyone with a 2013 had experienced a capacity bar loss yet.
+1TomT said:It is likely a little early for that at this juncture, regardless. At the similar time point for the 2011 and 2012s, I believe there were very few, if any, that had yet to loose a bar...
RegGuheert said:According to the Wiki, there were no reported losses in the 2011s by this time in 2011. Only two reports of a bar loss were made in October and no more bar losses occurred until spring of 2012.
Battery degrades much faster at 100% than 80%. So much so that within your 3 year lease it could have a major effect on range. If you need close to the max range it could affect the usefulness of the car.pbennett said:Maybe I should start another topic but since it's related to 2013 Leafs and capacity loss... I just got a 2013 Leaf SL under a 3 year lease. Is there any good reason I should set it to stop at 80% on charging instead of always charging to 100% for the extra range?
Click to openGonewild said:thankyouOB said:Gonewild said:I had my Battey pack changed in Nov after going through a hot summer. And only the first AC software update I believe.
is this news to just me???
what did it cost?
It was FREE. This is my second pack that has lost 1 bar each. I was the first with 12,000 miles in 7 months and a lost of 1 bar. They took my car to the test track and send data to Japan. Change pack just to take a look at the pack.
Now 7 month later I have 1 bar missing from the new pack.
I keeped this off board because I was happy they took care of me and no one else had a problem.
Why don't you consider getting LeafSpy? There are range test protocols, which you could follow if you wanted to get better data without a meter.DougWantsALeaf said:Given how quickly temperature, AC, average speed, number of stops changes the useful range, I can't yet tell if I have had any real degradation. That said, I am not quite at 2K miles, so not so worried yet.
DougWantsALeaf said:Was curious if as the TN plant perfected operations if the batteries were getting more consistent (And mildly better). I know they are still mainly focused on reducing battery cost over new range, but will be interesting to see over time.
dm33 said:Battery degrades much faster at 100% than 80%. So much so that within your 3 year lease it could have a major effect on range. If you need close to the max range it could affect the usefulness of the car.
DougWantsALeaf said:Why does the speeding degrade the battery? The fast discharge?
That's only seen to be true in hot climates like Phoenix. It may also be true elsewhere for those who put low miles on the car and want to keep it a long time. In locations like Seattle, battery cycling is seen to be dominant for very high-mileage drivers.surfingslovak said:...as it happens, ambient heat drowns out just about any other contributing factor by an order of magnitude.
I think the other factor with higher discharge rates (and higher regen rates) is heat. I see quite a bit more heating of the battery at 20+ kW than 10 kW or less. And that heat stays for awhile, given the mass of the battery. Driving 60 mph up a moderate grade or slow speeds up a steep hill raises the battery temperature quite a lot. As does charging and regen IME.surfingslovak said:I would take this type of interpretation with a grain of salt. While gentle driving is definitely something to recommend as a defensive practice, we have no way of measuring just how much better it is for the battery to drive 35 mph instead of 75 mph. Yes, the higher rate of discharge and the higher current will put more stress on the pack, but even 75 mph would translate to only about 1C discharge, which is relatively benign in the grand scheme of things. Faster discharge and higher speeds will lead to lower efficiency and range, which means that you will need to charge more and will put more cycles on the battery as a result. Stoaty incorporated this into his battery aging model, and having to charge 20% more often due to lower efficiency, definitely has a measurable impact...
Ok. Thats good to know.LEAFfan said:Much faster? Sorry, that just isn't true.dm33 said:Battery degrades much faster at 100% than 80%. So much so that within your 3 year lease it could have a major effect on range. If you need close to the max range it could affect the usefulness of the car.
I would challenge you to plot calendar losses versus cycling losses for different climates, and come up with a comparison. I would contend that with the LEAF the losses incurred from and because of ambient heat are larger than cycling losses. I would also challenge you or anyone else on this forum to find anyone in the field, who can conclusively demonstrate that any of the good battery care practices prolonged the usable life of their battery. We know that these practices are sound, and if we cannot see them manifested in the field, it's because of the sensitivity of this particular battery to ambient heat, which is hardly controllable by the user. I still recall the nearly religious debates on this forum in 2010 and 2011. There is almost nothing that came to pass. All these predictions turned out to be wrong, and sometimes quite significantly so. I wonder why.RegGuheert said:That's only seen to be true in hot climates like Phoenix. It may also be true elsewhere for those who put low miles on the car and want to keep it a long time. In locations like Seattle, battery cycling is seen to be dominant for very high-mileage drivers.surfingslovak said:...as it happens, ambient heat drowns out just about any other contributing factor by an order of magnitude.
The problem with a computer is that the battery will fully discharge after a relatively short time. With a LEAF, it would take a particularly long time for the Li-ion battery to discharge, especially if the 12V battery is disconnected.dm33 said:What about not using the battery? Apple says "For proper maintenance of a lithium-based battery, it’s important to keep the electrons in it moving occasionally".
There is a constant load on the 12V battery, which gets recharged (sort of!) by the traction battery every 5 days.dm33 said:We went on two trips for a week in our ICE. When I came back, there seemed to be a notable drop in capacity even with the car not used and sitting at 50% or so.
No. Sitting at 30% versus 100% makes a very big difference. Please have a look at the plot in Figure 1 in the paper linked by Stoaty. Notice that at 90% SOC, that battery loses about 5% of its capacity IN ONLY ONE MONTH, regardless of whether the temperature is 25C or 60C. At a 30% SOC, the battery doesn't lose nearly that much capacity in a year at 25C. (That chemistry is not the same as the one in the LEAF, but the trends should be similar.)dm33 said:Anyone else notice big drops when letting the car sit unused? I remember someone let their car sit at 100% for 3 weeks and they really hurt. But could it have been sitting vs. the 100%?
Enter your email address to join: