Charging below freezing

[Publius]

Seems like if there was battery damage from cold, the Chicago people would be shouting by now.

Philip

Judging by Phil's response, it seems prudent to plug-in and charge directly after stopping the vehicle when the temp is below freezing outside.

My routine in the summer is to leave the car at least 30 minutes before plugging in after getting home. In the winter I won't wait.

Here is my $0.02 shout from a climate colder than Chicago:
I have 2012 model, upstate NY, 1000' elevation. I have to chuckle when I read about 32F as being "cold". Cold here is below 0F, which frequently happens in winter. I do not have a heated garage, but have had no problems with 2012 model in the cold:
--If I charge as soon as I get home, and it's below 0F the next morning, battery heater keeps it at 2 bars
--If I set timer to charge at 2am, I have 3 or 4 bars in the morning when it's below 0F
--as noted by others, regenerative braking does not work when battery is cold, like two bars
--using the cabin heater to keep it toasty warm, like 65F, uses a humongous amount of battery: WITH cabin heater, my commute takes 14KWH of charging, compared to 9 or 10 in warm weather. I don't use cabin heater any more.

My settings for using Leaf in the frozen north:
--I HAVE NOT FOUND THE NEED TO USE THE CABIN HEATER AT ALL, EVEN BELOW 0F.
--I pre-heat the car while plugged in, for 5-10 minutes.
--I use the front seat and steering wheel heater (I no longer need gloves driving to work at sub zero temperatures).
--I set the front defrost on, then turn off AC, then set to minimum fan and minimum temp (60F)
--during my 16 mile commute, the energy monitor screen shows that this defrost setting plus the seat and steering heater uses an average of about 0.5 to 0.75 KW.
--At below 0F, recharging after my commute takes 10-11 KWH instead of 9-10 KWH in warmer weather, using this setting; and window never fogs or ices up (not at sub 0F, nor even when raining and 33F).
--and, no, I am not particularly cold hardy; my regular heavy winter coat plus the above keeps me quite comfortable, at least for my 35min trip.

Paul

Paul, I live in upstate NY, too (Rochester area), but judging by the information you provided, I'm going to guess you live somewhere around Oswego or Watertown. Am I close?

We had single-digit temperatures in Rochester recently, but we didn't dip below 0F. I usually have four bars on the battery temperature gauge, even in single-digit temperatures or after the car sat outside all night below freezing. I think I've only seen two bars once, and I park outside 24/7.

I've only had my LEAF for a few weeks, so I'm still working on managing the heater without killing my range. When you say you use between .5 and .75 kw running your defroster, are you checking your energy usage after you've warmed the car up (plugged in or after you've ran it for a while)? Even at the lowest settings I usually see 3kw or more while the heater is warming up.

 

[GetOffYourGas]

How does the LEAF handle in the snow compared to other front wheel drive vehicles? Is the traction control an asset or a hindrance?

The Leaf handles fairly well in the snow. Traction control is an asset most of the time, but sometimes you just have to turn it off and let the wheels spin to get any forward momentum. I prefer to drive in ECO in the snow because D has too much torque (and tends to spin the tires too easily). The biggest problem in the snow is the stock tires - they are useless. Put a set of snow tires on the car, and it's rock solid.

judging by the information you provided, I'm going to guess you live somewhere around Oswego or Watertown. Am I close?

My guess would be North Country (Watertown to Plattsburgh) or somewhere in the 'dacks. Oswego gets crazy wind chill from the lake, but I don't believe it gets that cold. When I lived in Potsdam, we would go for three months without seeing positive temperatures. When the temperature finally went positive in March, I would break out my shorts!

 

[kubel]

How does the LEAF handle in the snow compared to other front wheel drive vehicles? Is the traction control an asset or a hindrance?

One time when I was going uphill from a stop on ice, I had a very slow start but I eventually got up to speed. In typical ice or snow, the traction control isn't overly aggressive so as to make the car not move. It's more of an asset than a hindrance. I have a lot of videos of how well the car handles the snow but not all are uploaded.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBD0nbGjBfY[/youtube]

 

[willingp]

--as noted by others, regenerative braking does not work when battery is cold, like two bars

Not true! It doesn't work (or works badly at max. 1-5kW rate) only for couple of first kilometers driven. Then it works better and better with every km driven (as battery warms up, even temperature bars doesn't change). You can monitor it by power-circles (at negative side, if it is double-circle it is working, if single then not) or by energy monitor.

--during my 16 mile commute, the energy monitor screen shows that this defrost setting plus the seat and steering heater uses an average of about 0.5 to 0.75 KW.

Energy monitor doesn't display consumption of seat and steering wheel heaters at all. So I wonder how you can know it from energy monitor!? :shock:

you can turn them off and on and watch the total change, so admittedly, it is just a rough estimate.
Paul

 

[Den]

--as noted by others, regenerative braking does not work when battery is cold, like two bars

Not true! It doesn't work (or works badly at max. 1-5kW rate) only for couple of first kilometers driven. Then it works better and better with every km driven (as battery warms up, even temperature bars doesn't change). You can monitor it by power-circles (at negative side, if it is double-circle it is working, if single then not) or by energy monitor.

--during my 16 mile commute, the energy monitor screen shows that this defrost setting plus the seat and steering heater uses an average of about 0.5 to 0.75 KW.

Energy monitor doesn't display consumption of seat and steering wheel heaters at all. So I wonder how you can know it from energy monitor!? :shock:

you can turn them off and on and watch the total change, so admittedly, it is just a rough estimate.
Paul

There will be no change!

Meaning - turn A/C heating off - consumption will be zero. Turn seats and steering wheel heating on - consumption will be still zero on climate energy meter and no change on "others". So it is not displayed at all! There also other devices that are just not displayed in power meter.

 

[dgpcolorado]

How does the LEAF handle in the snow compared to other front wheel drive vehicles? Is the traction control an asset or a hindrance?

The Leaf handles fairly well in the snow. Traction control is an asset most of the time, but sometimes you just have to turn it off and let the wheels spin to get any forward momentum. I prefer to drive in ECO in the snow because D has too much torque (and tends to spin the tires too easily). The biggest problem in the snow is the stock tires - they are useless. Put a set of snow tires on the car, and it's rock solid.

I agree that the LEAF does fine in the snow, like most FWD cars. When I get my 400 foot gravel driveway shoveled the LEAF gets up it fairly well, as did my previous FWD car, but I do sometimes have to turn off traction control briefly. I do OK with the stock tires but when my steep curved driveway gets slick I have had to use traction mats. I did buy some chains but haven't used them.

Once I get up my driveway, the roads tend to be plowed, and sanded on hills and intersections, so driving the LEAF isn't an issue. I usually avoid driving it while it is snowing but when I get caught out in snow it does fine if I travel at a safe speed. In my experience, AWD and 4WD cars tend to have more accidents because the drivers get overconfident and drive much too fast for the conditions: AWD cars don't stop any better than 2WD ones! That's why I used to see them upside down along freeways during snowstorms when I lived in the big city.

As the tread on the stock tires wears I expect the snow performance to decline. I'm not using snow tires because 1) I have a 4WD Jeep Cherokee for pushing through deep snow and 2) my grocery shopping pushes the LEAF range in winter so I don't want to take the snow tire hit to that range.

 

[Den]

I drive on snow every day from the end of November and I like it. I put Nokian Hakkapelitta 8 winter tires and they really performs very good with Leaf.

I even was able to drive through 20cm deep snow (just for test, but Leaf passed it!).

I would say that Leaf is much much better for driving trough snow that any ICE car of same class.

 

[dgpcolorado]

I drive on snow every day from the end of November and I like it. I put Nokian Hakkapelitta 7 winter tires and they really performs very good with Leaf.

I even was able to drive through 20cm deep snow (just for test, but Leaf passed it!).

I would say that Leaf is much much better for driving trough snow that any ICE car of same class.

I'm impressed! It takes really good snow tires to get a 2WD car through snow that deep!

 

[JPWhite]

AWD cars don't stop any better than 2WD ones!

Too true!!

How come you and I know that but the owners of these vehicles don't? All cars have 4 wheel brakes, which part of that don't the owners get?

 

[JPWhite]

I drive on snow every day from the end of November and I like it. I put Nokian Hakkapelitta 7 winter tires and they really performs very good with Leaf.

Do you lose much range using snow tires?

 

[Den]

Do you lose much range using snow tires?

No, I don't see any visible loss due to tires. On stock tires at heavy rain it even performed much more worse than on winter tires in snow. And this was +10C (rain) vs. -10C(snow)!

Actually my worst experience was exactly in heavy rain and on stock tires. At snow it performs very good and I really like it.

As I already mentioned in some other post, I can do about 120km (75 miles) with climate control off and about 100km (62 miles) with climate control on. And this is at -10C (14F) with snow tires (Nokian Hakkapelitta 8).

 

[TonyWilliams]

As I already mentioned in some other post, I can do about 120km (75 miles) with climate control off and about 100km (62 miles) with climate control on. And this is at -10C (14F) with snow tires (Nokian Hakkapelitta 7).

What is the average watts per km on those trips? (or km per kWh, or miles per kWh)

 

[Den]

As I already mentioned in some other post, I can do about 120km (75 miles) with climate control off and about 100km (62 miles) with climate control on. And this is at -10C (14F) with snow tires (Nokian Hakkapelitta 7).

What is the average watts per km on those trips? (or km per kWh, or miles per kWh)

0,15 kWh/km CC off.
0,18 kWh/km CC on.

Total average displayed in Leaf is 0,17 kWh/km for about 3000 km driven from November 21.

 

[GRA]

AWD cars don't stop any better than 2WD ones!

Too true!!

How come you and I know that but the owners of these vehicles don't? All cars have 4 wheel brakes, which part of that don't the owners get?

Speaking from personal experience, I think it's the freedom from having to chain up that causes people to push the limits. No more slapping the inside of your fender wells and getting out to tighten the chains, so you figure you can go a bit faster, and then a bit faster. I slid off the road on a curve (that I decided to brake on) and over a small tree ($1,300, but still driveable) in my first Subaru on its first snow trip for just that reason; in my previous car with chains on I never would have entered the corner that fast. After that, I thought about it and realized what should have been blindingly obvious, that 4WD helped me get up hills that I couldn't have otherwise, but my stopping traction was no better than anyone else's.

This message was reinforced on a later trip, where (now driving at a safe speed) I came around a blind corner in Yosemite and found five 4WD SUVs concertina'd into each other behind a bus that had slewed itself across most of the road- fortunately damage was only to vehicles and egos. I was able to stop because of my prior enlightenment, but I got the hell out of there before the next noob came around the corner and smacked me.

 

[abasile]

Speaking from personal experience, I think it's the freedom from having to chain up that causes people to push the limits.

That's a California thing, of course. The California Highway Patrol typically requires 2WD vehicles to use snow chains/cables on mountain roads with some snow and ice, while exempting AWD/4WD vehicles. I hate this policy because it forces me to chain up the LEAF even when it's truly not necessary for a driver with snow experience. I will admit, however, that this policy does reduce the number of inexperienced SoCal flatlanders driving too fast for the conditions, since it's harder to drive fast with chains, and many people don't want to even bother with them. I will say that many California mountain residents (my family included) own an AWD vehicle more to avoid chain requirements than because AWD is truly needed.

Other states like Colorado and New York don't tend to force unnecessary use of chains. It helps when most people have some snow driving experience.

Snow cables do increase energy consumption in the LEAF, but not in any sort of extreme way.

 

[dgpcolorado]

Speaking from personal experience, I think it's the freedom from having to chain up that causes people to push the limits.

That's a California thing, of course. The California Highway Patrol typically requires 2WD vehicles to use snow chains/cables on mountain roads with some snow and ice, while exempting AWD/4WD vehicles. I hate this policy because it forces me to chain up the LEAF even when it's truly not necessary for a driver with snow experience. I will admit, however, that this policy does reduce the number of inexperienced SoCal flatlanders driving too fast for the conditions, since it's harder to drive fast with chains, and many people don't want to even bother with them. I will say that many California mountain residents (my family included) own an AWD vehicle more to avoid chain requirements than because AWD is truly needed.

Other states like Colorado and New York don't tend to force unnecessary use of chains. It helps when most people have some snow driving experience.

Snow cables do increase energy consumption in the LEAF, but not in any sort of extreme way.

Yes, chains are only required here for commercial vehicles in most cases; the conditions have to be extreme for 4WD or snow tires to be required for passenger cars to proceed. In large part that is because the roads are plowed and sanded, or treated with mag chloride, quickly and efficiently. For small vehicles safe driving is the responsibility of the driver and a crash on snow is an automatic presumption of unsafe driving.

As for the AWD thing, my observation is that AWD/4WD cars have much better traction for getting started, climbing hills and, let's be honest, for cornering. That ability to get going so easily without the usual signs of poor traction, such as fishtailing, causes the AWD drivers to become complacent and to go too fast for the conditions. It doesn't help that many SUVs are heavy and that extra momentum makes braking even more difficult.

In Colorado, the most accidents happen during the first snowstorm of the season. It takes time for drivers to learn to slow down in the Fall after a carefree high-speed summer.

 

[GRA]

Speaking from personal experience, I think it's the freedom from having to chain up that causes people to push the limits.

That's a California thing, of course. The California Highway Patrol typically requires 2WD vehicles to use snow chains/cables on mountain roads with some snow and ice, while exempting AWD/4WD vehicles. I hate this policy because it forces me to chain up the LEAF even when it's truly not necessary for a driver with snow experience. I will admit, however, that this policy does reduce the number of inexperienced SoCal flatlanders driving too fast for the conditions, since it's harder to drive fast with chains, and many people don't want to even bother with them. I will say that many California mountain residents (my family included) own an AWD vehicle more to avoid chain requirements than because AWD is truly needed.

Other states like Colorado and New York don't tend to force unnecessary use of chains. It helps when most people have some snow driving experience.

Snow cables do increase energy consumption in the LEAF, but not in any sort of extreme way.

I got my Subarus for the exact reason you describe, not wanting to mess with chains when I knew I didn't need them; If I felt they were necessary, I didn't need a sign to convince me. This is especially an issue on I-80 up to Tahoe, because once you reach the first crest after climbing up from say Baxter the road dips and may be clear again for 5-10 miles. So you either have to leave your chains on and grind them, or take them off and put them back on again a few minutes later. Total PITA.

For several years I spent Christmas in Yosemite Valley, and the roads were typically dry except for two corners that would get frost on them overnight. But the rangers would put chain requirements up for the entire valley under the lowest common denominator principle, so I might drive around anything up to 14 miles, grinding my tires, chains and teeth on pavement, for those two short curves. One year, climbing out of the valley on my way home one night, my chains had ground the tread off the rear tires on my '65 Chevy so they were bald, and I broke one chain. After spending an inordinate amount of time getting it unwrapped from the axle ( I had to jack the car) I said the hell with it and removed the other before it broke too. If any ranger wanted to stop me for not being chained up they'd get a piece of my mind. I then drove out over Crane Flat, much of the way on snow, with no trouble whatsoever. As it happens, the rangers more or less assume that people out driving at night are locals who know what they're doing rather than lowland tourists, so they tend not to bother people then. And in Yosemite, unlike I-80 it tends to go direct from no chains to all chains, no exceptions

I've never tried cable chains. When I _need_ chains I want maximum grip, and from what I've read the cable variety doesn't do that. I'll take the old-fashioned kind, with V-bars if I can get them, but I can't remember the last time I really needed chains. I tend to cherry pick my trips more for weather now, I guess.

 

[JPWhite]

I got my Subarus for the exact reason you describe, not wanting to mess with chains when I knew I didn't need them;

This should make the Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV very attractive to purchasers in some states, it's 4wd with a volt like electric range. It's on sale now in Japan, will go on sale in Australia in June and I believe it will make its way to the states end of this year/beginning of next. If it lives up to its billing it'll replace my wife's Altima. Her extended warranty is up in spring 2014.

 

[GetOffYourGas]

Speaking from personal experience, I think it's the freedom from having to chain up that causes people to push the limits.

That's a California thing, of course. The California Highway Patrol typically requires 2WD vehicles to use snow chains/cables on mountain roads with some snow and ice, while exempting AWD/4WD vehicles. I hate this policy because it forces me to chain up the LEAF even when it's truly not necessary for a driver with snow experience. I will admit, however, that this policy does reduce the number of inexperienced SoCal flatlanders driving too fast for the conditions, since it's harder to drive fast with chains, and many people don't want to even bother with them. I will say that many California mountain residents (my family included) own an AWD vehicle more to avoid chain requirements than because AWD is truly needed.

Other states like Colorado and New York don't tend to force unnecessary use of chains. It helps when most people have some snow driving experience.

Snow cables do increase energy consumption in the LEAF, but not in any sort of extreme way.

I was surprised to see the signs my first time driving up to Tahoe. At the time, chains were "required". I didn't own a set (still don't), so I just pushed my little civic onward anyway. Nobody bothered me, although several other cars were pulled over. I've always wondered whether they didn't notice me, or saw the NY plates and figured I know how to drive in snow. Either way, there was barely any snow on the road, but plenty of drivers off of it. Californians :roll:

Around here, chains are not required, but the SUVs are still the ones in the ditches while the FWD cars take their time and get there safely. I agree that it seems to be the feeling of invincibility that lands the SUVs in the ditch.

 

[GRA]

I got my Subarus for the exact reason you describe, not wanting to mess with chains when I knew I didn't need them;

This should make the Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV very attractive to purchasers in some states, it's 4wd with a volt like electric range. It's on sale now in Japan, will go on sale in Australia in June and I believe it will make its way to the states end of this year/beginning of next. If it lives up to its billing it'll replace my wife's Altima. Her extended warranty is up in spring 2014.

It's certainly the PEV that seems to best fit my needs at the moment, assuming they did a proper job on the battery and didn't stick it in the cargo compartment like Ford did with the C-Max Energi. They're C _U_ Vs, and the U is the critical part for some of us. If I don't have a flat or nearly flat load floor with the rear seats down so I can sleep in it, and enough space in the cargo area (with sturdy tie-downs) with the rear seats up so I can put lots of Scuba tanks there and keep them from smacking into me in an accident, it isn't going to work.

Course, the problem is that it's a transitional technology, and my current Subie will probably last me another decade, so do I really want to buy something like an Outlander now and then upgrade to a BEV in another 5-10 years when someone makes one that meets my needs? It doesn't make any financial sense, and probably not environmental sense either given that EVs have a much higher proportion of their life-cycle pollution embodied in their manufacture than an ICE does.