First day with my Leaf, first low battery warning

[madbrain]

On that note, it might be worth revisiting this excellent trip report. Apparently, you can drive from Sunnyvale all the way to the top of Mt. Hamilton on eight bars. The OP should be able to go halfway if he followed the same route and had three bars indicated. I hope this helps answer any concerns about climbing hills with the Leaf.

OK, that is very impressive. I see no indication of driving times, though. Speeds are mentioned are they are obviously very low.

Mt Hamilton is actually not far from where I live. I drove there this summer in my Prius. I wasn't obsessed with speeds or mileage, quite the opposite - the observatory only didn't have a lot of time left before closing for visitors, so I was rushing on the way up as safe as the road allowed. On the way back, I'm not sure why, but I also rushed . The only data point I can offer is that I drove fast enough to get both myself and my passenger carsick

I never understood why people claim that drivers don't get carsick. It is a myth - it has happened to me many times on curvy roads such as 130, 17 , 84 as a driver, but more often as a passenger.

 

[dgpcolorado]

...I never understood why people claim that drivers don't get carsick. It is a myth - it has happened to me many times on curvy roads such as 130, 17 , 84 as a driver, but more often as a passenger.

Interesting. I've never been carsick as a driver. I think the reason is that a driver has more control and feedback with what is happening/going-to-happen with regard to motion than a passenger is.

Same thing happened as a pilot: as a passenger in a sailplane I would sometimes feel a bit ill in rough conditions but it rarely happened when I was at the controls unless doing serious acrobatics, such as repeated spins. That's because I could anticipate what was going to happen to my inner ear as I adjusted the controls. But knocking off ten spin rotations at a time over and over eventually would get to me, though the wild ride was lots of fun.

 

[dgpcolorado]

Thank you for your feedback dgpcolorado. Did Nissan disclose any other improvements for the 2013 model in addition to the 6.6 kw charger? For example, is it likely they will have a battery with a longer range?

While nobody can say for sure, reports suggest that the 2013 battery will be the same as in the 2012 model.

Also, I am not very technical, what you are saying is the 6.6 kw charger for 2013 is only for 220v use? They will not, can not, improve the charging time for 110v?

As others have said, no, 120 Volt charging will not be faster in the 2013 because at 12 Amps it is already as fast as is safe for standard 15 Amp outlets.

My thinking was that these EVs are like the iPhone, the newer version is worth waiting for if it's only a few months away.

Among the reported changes for the 2013: a dark interior color, a leather seat option, a 6.6 kW charger option for faster Level 2 charging, a more efficient heat-pump heater for moderately cold weather, a less expensive base "S" model that will likely not have features such as nav system, cruise control, Quick Charge, and the faster L2 charger option. One big advantage of the 2012 models is that some of the closeout lease deals are very good. You won't likely see such deals on the 2013 models until this time next year. But pricing for the 2013 models is a big unknown.

Some background on expected usage: I will use this EV approximately 4 times a day, each time approx. 12 to 15 miles of which 5 miles will be in hilly conditions. So, something like 60 miles per day total. In between these short trips I will be able to plug it in 50% of the time to a 110v outlet.

This should be pretty easy to do but it depends on speeds and, to some extent, on weather conditions (your range will decrease in cool weather and in rain). If you had access to L2 charge stations (or quick charge) it would be even easier.

 

[madbrain]

...I never understood why people claim that drivers don't get carsick. It is a myth - it has happened to me many times on curvy roads such as 130, 17 , 84 as a driver, but more often as a passenger.

Interesting. I've never been carsick as a driver. I think the reason is that a driver has more control and feedback with what is happening/going-to-happen with regard to motion than a passenger is.

Yeah, I googled for some explanations yesterday, they just don't match my experience.

http://www.ehow.com/facts_5859173_don_t-drivers-motion-sickness_.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Same thing happened as a pilot: as a passenger in a sailplane I would sometimes feel a bit ill in rough conditions but it rarely happened when I was at the controls unless doing serious acrobatics, such as repeated spins. That's because I could anticipate what was going to happen to my inner ear as I adjusted the controls. But knocking off ten spin rotations at a time over and over eventually would get to me, though the wild ride was lots of fun.

Anticipation doesn't always seem to help my motion sickness with the driving on those curvy roads, sadly.

 

[madbrain]

^^^
http://priuschat.com/threads/google-earth-can-give-you-an-elevation-profile-of-a-route-between-2-points.100653/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; might help re: elevation data.

Thanks, I have never installed google earth. Wish they could make that stuff run in the browser.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

i have to echo dpg's experiences. the reason I dont get sick as a driver is because i am in control. my brain tells my body what to expect. but when i am a passenger, i dont know what is coming even if i am sitting in the front seat with my eyes wide open.

keep in mind, when you are car sick, most people feel better if they close their eyes and the reason is their eyes are confusing the brain and that is the source of the sick feelings.

My SO states she gets sick if she rides in the back seat of both the LEAF and the Prius (with a young child this happens a lot!) in the front seat, its not as bad but sometimes we simply just switch driving. as for me? i dont get car sick very often, rarely if ever get headaches but i cannot spin on anything for even a brief period of time without getting ill.

i used to be able to do merry go rounds and that kind of stuff but something happened to me in my late 20's that changed all that...

 

[madbrain]

At 0.6 mile and 321ft I think it's about the same slope, but I'm not sure how reliable the distance estimate I got from google is.
The odometer doesn't measure below 0.1 mile accuracy either. As far as I recall it is 0.5 mile on the odometer and not 0.6 . So could be a little under 0.6 .

Edit: maybe I can put the car in metric tomorrow and get something more accurate.

Put it in metric, after resetting the trip meter on top, it showed 0.9 km at the bottom.
So the driving distance is between 0.9km and 0.6 miles which is 0.96 km. I think it's about as accurate as I'm going to get it.

Not sure what kind of slope that translates to.

I would think the speed of the uphill driving would be very important in how much energy is used, not just distance and elevation.
I had been driving 15-20 mph uphill, so not very fast.

Tonight I will try to reset the miles/kWh at the bottom of that hill and then check the average at the bottom to see what I get. I expect it to be in the 0.5 - 1 mile/kWh as the realtime miles/kWh display has been showing it very close to 0 the entire time.

One thing I did in my commute to work today was stop using ECO mode once I got to the freeway. I was able to drive between 65-75 mph and still average 4.5 miles/kWh (4.4 on the dash) once I got to the office. Of course this is the average for the downhill commute, I will see what I get on the way back tonight.

So it looks to me like ECO mode is mostly appropriate for downhill but not much else, much like B mode on the Prius, and my use of ECO mode the entire time has been responsible for my relatively low miles/kWh averages the last 3 days.

Even though I had been driving at or under the 65mph speed limit on the freeway, it was rarely possible to maintain that speed. Cruise control doesn't really work with the traffic, I have to constantly brake and then accelerate again back to 65, and frequently change lane too with the incoming traffic. This has happened no matter if I was in lane 2, 3 or 4 on 101 and no matter what time I have been driving, almost always off-peak hours except yesterday. ECO mode causes deceleration to be very quick, and then you need to step up the accelerator quite a bit just to get back to 65. Maybe this is obvious, but no more ECO mode for me on freeways.

I'm slowly getting the hang of the car though, monday my average on carwings was 2.9 miles/kWh - this was only the uphill commute as I setup carwings in the afternoon.
Tuesday average was 3.6, wednesday 4 . So there is some hope.

I can foresee a not too distant time when I will be able to get rid of one of the 2 Prius ICEs. My partner has an outdoor 120V outlet at his mother's house where he could plug-in the car at least for some L1 when we switch cars.

 

[madbrain]

keep in mind, when you are car sick, most people feel better if they close their eyes and the reason is their eyes are confusing the brain and that is the source of the sick feelings.

Thanks, but that's not going to help much if you are the driver though. You might not feel better after you crash, lol.

My SO states she gets sick if she rides in the back seat of both the LEAF and the Prius (with a young child this happens a lot!) in the front seat, its not as bad but sometimes we simply just switch driving. as for me? i dont get car sick very often, rarely if ever get headaches but i cannot spin on anything for even a brief period of time without getting ill.

i used to be able to do merry go rounds and that kind of stuff but something happened to me in my late 20's that changed all that...

Yes, if I ride in the back I will get carsick everytime on the windy roads. But most of the time I'm the driver or more rarely in the front passenger seat.
I definitely get less motion sickness as a driver than passenger, but it still happens.

 

[planet4ever]

Put it in metric, after resetting the trip meter on top, it showed 0.9 km at the bottom. So the driving distance is between 0.9km and 0.6 miles which is 0.96 km. I think it's about as accurate as I'm going to get it. Not sure what kind of slope that translates to. I would think the speed of the uphill driving would be very important in how much energy is used, not just distance and elevation. I had been driving 15-20 mph uphill, so not very fast.

I personally think you don't need to worry about slope. Not that it doesn't matter; of course it does. But the easy way to estimate is to pretend you are driving the same distance and speed on level ground, and then add the energy needed to lift the car from the starting altitude to the ending altitude. As Nubo said, allow 1.5kWh per 1000 feet, which is indeed about 1 bar. So, for your total of 564 feet rise going home, the elevation costs you half a bar or a bit more, maybe 4% of the (new) battery's capacity. It could be more than that if you have elevation losses along the way.

One thing I did in my commute to work today was stop using ECO mode once I got to the freeway. I was able to drive between 65-75 mph and still average 4.5 miles/kWh (4.4 on the dash) once I got to the office. Of course this is the average for the downhill commute, I will see what I get on the way back tonight. So it looks to me like ECO mode is mostly appropriate for downhill but not much else, much like B mode on the Prius, and my use of ECO mode the entire time has been responsible for my relatively low miles/kWh averages the last 3 days.

I doubt if ECO vs. D makes much difference on the freeway, at least in a mild climate like ours. I do use D myself most of the time on the freeway, because when I take my foot off the accelerator I slow more gradually. Given the same average speed, the more you can keep your speed constant, the better your mileage will be. If I do need to slow more rapidly, I put on the brake lightly, and that warns the driver behind me. But I don't think there is any difference in efficiency between slowing in D with light braking and foot-off-the-pedal slowing in ECO.

Cruise control doesn't really work with the traffic, I have to constantly brake and then accelerate again back to 65, and frequently change lane too with the incoming traffic. This has happened no matter if I was in lane 2, 3 or 4 on 101 and no matter what time I have been driving, almost always off-peak hours except yesterday. ECO mode causes deceleration to be very quick, and then you need to step up the accelerator quite a bit just to get back to 65. Maybe this is obvious, but no more ECO mode for me on freeways.

Just as a test, try this: Use cruise control at 65 with ECO. If you need to slow, just hit the Cancel switch on the steering wheel. Use light accelerator pedal pressure as needed to limit your slowing. When you can speed up again, press up on the Resume switch and take your foot off the accelerator. You'll find that Nissan has programmed Resume for surprisingly significant acceleration. That may not be optimum in energy use, but I expect the engineers did quite a bit of testing of it. As we have discussed in other threads, rapid acceleration does not, per se, use much extra energy. What hurts is overshooting your goal and then decelerating, or getting back to your goal only to have to slow down again right away.

I do use cruise control on 101, but that is mostly south of Capitol Expressway. I am fully aware of how much wilder 101 is north of there. You probably follow too closely, but then we all do, because otherwise we will have a steady stream of drivers cutting in front of us. That's much less of a problem in the slow lane. Apart from a few maniacs who won't be slowing you down, most drivers stay out of that lane except when entering or leaving the freeway. So I usually set cruise at 60 and go with the truck traffic (which is mostly driving 5 mph over their 55 mph speed limit). Except for rush hours, of course; personally, I am able to avoid those most of the time.

Ray

 

[surfingslovak]

Tonight I will try to reset the miles/kWh at the bottom of that hill and then check the average at the bottom to see what I get. I expect it to be in the 0.5 - 1 mile/kWh as the realtime miles/kWh display has been showing it very close to 0 the entire time.

Good thinking, but that might not work. The economy gauge needs couple of miles to settle and start indicating a correct value. In my experience, about 3 to 4 miles are needed, but don't quote me on that. With the exception of a Gid meter, I wouldn't know of a good way of measuring energy usage going up a short hill. You could try to bring up the charging display and see if the number of hours on 120V increments by one or two digits. That would give us a rough idea. The charging time display is controlled by the same button on the left side of the instrument cluster: http://bit.ly/leafenergyeconomy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[elmobob]

I love my leaf ... however I've had it for 5 months now and from experience had to learn to adjust my driving style based on how far I need to go on that day, weekdays I usually do not have many unexpected trips , my commute is 22 miles plus maybe 5 miles of errands so 27 miles out of an 80% charge provides more than enough even with the most aggressive, carelessly inefficient driving I end up with 3-4 bars spare. On weekends when a destination is beyond 40 miles I drive very conservatively, on eco; climate on 70 degrees in summer, 60 degrees or off in winter, not going beyond 55mph and very very gentle grandma acceleration, this way I've achieved the highest of 70 miles from 100% charge with one bar left. I would never push it beyond that. I average 4 miles per KW on the car's dash. The car is proving good for 95% of my driving needs however I've had to learn to work with it's limitations.

The only way I see myself squeezing 100 miles out of it is by running on a flat road with no traffic lights at a constant 35 mph, no headwinds with 70 degree weather, no road I travel thru fit that scenario.

I got my blue 2012 SL on saturday. Trickled charged it to 100% .

I had a number of errands to run on sunday.

I started the day around 1:30pm from 12 bars and 100% charge.

I reset the trip meter. The GOM was showing 74 miles. I put the car in eco mode, it showed about 88.

1) My first errand one was for a haircut. I drove the car downhill from the very steep road near my home, half a mile down and about 600ft elevation. At the bottom the GOM was up from 88 to 91, which is was nice.
On my way back home, that same half mile drive uphill caused the GOM to go from 88 to 71. I did not put the car to charge again, since the battery was still mostly full and I had only driven about 4 miles from full charge.

2) Next errand was a medical appointment in Cupertino. 17 miles away, 80% of it freeway. I was quite late. I drove downhill in ECO mode again and on city streets as well, but on the freeway was driving a little past the speed limit, between 65 and 80. By the time I arrived the GOM was at 45 (ECO mode stat).

3) After that I did not go back home, but made two grocery trips at Costco in Santa Clara and Trader Joe's nearby on Coleman. I was driving the speed limit on the freeway, probably about 10 miles. Then I went back to east SJ, another 10 miles or so. The GOM (ECO mode) was at 18 miles. I put the car to trickle charge again.

4) After about 1h30 of trickle charging, the car was showing about 27 miles, I went to pick up a friend in downtown San Jose and to have dinner at a restaurant also in downtown.

5) After dinner we drove to my home in east SJ to play the piano. Don't remember the exact GOM. I put the car to trickle charge again.

6) Once we were done playing, after about 2 hours of trickle charging, I drove my friend back to his home in downtown. The GOM was showing 29 miles in ECO at this point. His home is about 5 miles away from mine, so 10 miles roundtrip. It was starting to rain, and a bit cold on the way back, so I turned up the heater for a few minutes. The GOM went down very rapidly from 19 to 12.
By the time I got to the bottom of the hill, the GOM was at 10. 0.5 mile later, on top of the hill, and safe at home around midnight, the car was displaying the first low battery warning, and I had one bar left, and 5 miles blinking. I put the car to trickle charge again.

Stats for the day from the car :

- According to the trip meter, I drove it 76.9 miles today.
- Average speed 15.9 mph
- I don't quite understand yet why I get a different display for miles per kWh on the dashboard and on the screen.
I think perhaps the one on the dashboard is lifetime and the one on the screen is for the trip. The former says 3.4, and the later 3.6 .

Again this was from 100% charge and 12 bars, plus about 3 to 4 hours of trickle charge.

I drove very conservatively in ECO mode the entire time for all the trips above, except for the second errand as I was late, where I may have driven perhaps 10 miles between 75 and 80mph on the freeway.
AC was on most of the day on low setting.

It is a little bit scary to me to think what would have happened if I charged the car to 80% only, or if I didn't plug it back in to trickle charges throughout the day at almost every occasion I had (except after the first errand).

Given that I had 5 miles and 1 bar at the end, how much did the car really have left in it ?
I fear that in the not too distant future, I will be stuck very close to home in the middle of that very steep uphill road on the way home given how much the car seems to hate it - that half mile has taken between 5 and 17 miles off the estimate between the 4 times I drove it today.

I should probably program the Nissan road assistance number into my cell phone ASAP, as I foresee having to ask them to tow me home in the future on more than one occasion.

I will apply to get the L2 charger with Ecotality as soon as possible.

I will be doing L2 charging at work also from tomorrow on.

I knew the limitations of the car in terms of range when I bought it so the above doesn't entirely surprise me, but still can't say this is going to alleviate any range anxiety I thought I might encounter.
Range awareness is more like it, at this point.

I only wish Ecotality could put a CHAdeMO while they are at it instead of an L2. There is triphase power at the pole that serves my house due to the city water tank right behind my home, I guess their pumps need a lot of juice. I don't know if it runs on 440V.

 

[madbrain]

Good thinking, but that might not work. The economy gauge needs couple of miles to settle and start indicating a correct value. In my experience, about 3 to 4 miles are needed, but don't quote me on that. With the exception of a Gid meter, I wouldn't know of a good way of measuring energy usage going up a short hill. You could try to bring up the charging display and see if the number of hours on 120V increments by one or two digits. That would give us a rough idea. The charging time display is controlled by the same button on the left side of the instrument cluster: http://bit.ly/leafenergyeconomy" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Dash didn't indicate any value until about 1/4 mile.
I don't know if it's accurate, but when resetting at the bottom, by the time I got to the top, I had an average of 0.9 miles/kWh on the dash and 1 on the LCD.
That sounds about right to me given that the realtime display was almost all the way at 0 the whole time.

For 0.6 miles uphill at 0.9 miles/kWh, that would means it's using about 650 Wh each time to go uphill when I get home, or about 3% of the usable battery. It's common for me to make several small trips from/to home on weekends, which is what I did last sunday on my first day - I drove home uphill 4 times, so those steep 2.4 miles consumed about as many kWh, or about 12% of the battery. If that's true, it's not too surprising that I got the low battery warning even with 3.5 hours of trickle charge.

I will look at the charge time increase next time I go up, but I don't think it will give me anything more accurate. The only way would be to drive it many times up and down until I exhaust the battery. But the downhill would regenerate some each time, I got 48 miles per kWh going down yesterday - after resetting on top, and reading the average at the bottom.

 

[WetEV]

I will look at the charge time increase next time I go up, but I don't think it will give me anything more accurate. The only way would be to drive it many times up and down until I exhaust the battery. But the downhill would regenerate some each time, I got 48 miles per kWh going down yesterday - after resetting on top, and reading the average at the bottom.

I also live at the top of a hill. In the summer, if I reset my dash or console miles/kWh display after backing of the the garage, I can get as good as 99.9 miles/kWh at the bottom of the hill.

 

[madbrain]

I personally think you don't need to worry about slope. Not that it doesn't matter; of course it does. But the easy way to estimate is to pretend you are driving the same distance and speed on level ground, and then add the energy needed to lift the car from the starting altitude to the ending altitude. As Nubo said, allow 1.5kWh per 1000 feet, which is indeed about 1 bar. So, for your total of 564 feet rise going home, the elevation costs you half a bar or a bit more, maybe 4% of the (new) battery's capacity. It could be more than that if you have elevation losses along the way.

That makes sense and would match my findings - last 321 ft/0.6 miles at 15- 20mph seem to be taking about 0.6 kWh .

I doubt if ECO vs. D makes much difference on the freeway, at least in a mild climate like ours. I do use D myself most of the time on the freeway, because when I take my foot off the accelerator I slow more gradually.

Yes, D causes slowing to be more gradual, and that appears to make the most difference.

Given the same average speed, the more you can keep your speed constant, the better your mileage will be. If I do need to slow more rapidly, I put on the brake lightly, and that warns the driver behind me. But I don't think there is any difference in efficiency between slowing in D with light braking and foot-off-the-pedal slowing in ECO.

I think the later slows down more.

Just as a test, try this: Use cruise control at 65 with ECO. If you need to slow, just hit the Cancel switch on the steering wheel. Use light accelerator pedal pressure as needed to limit your slowing. When you can speed up again, press up on the Resume switch and take your foot off the accelerator. You'll find that Nissan has programmed Resume for surprisingly significant acceleration. That may not be optimum in energy use, but I expect the engineers did quite a bit of testing of it. As we have discussed in other threads, rapid acceleration does not, per se, use much extra energy. What hurts is overshooting your goal and then decelerating, or getting back to your goal only to have to slow down again right away.

I was trying to use cruise control with ECO the first few days on the freeway. I did try using cancel, but it immediately slows down quite a bit.
Thanks for the tip about the resume switch. I didn't understand why sometimes I got so much sudden acceleration. This is a bit scary actually.
I was using the coast/set switch to resume, and then increasing the speed. I don't recall seeing a resume switch on my 2007 Prius.

I do use cruise control on 101, but that is mostly south of Capitol Expressway. I am fully aware of how much wilder 101 is north of there. You probably follow too closely, but then we all do, because otherwise we will have a steady stream of drivers cutting in front of us. That's much less of a problem in the slow lane. Apart from a few maniacs who won't be slowing you down, most drivers stay out of that lane except when entering or leaving the freeway. So I usually set cruise at 60 and go with the truck traffic (which is mostly driving 5 mph over their 55 mph speed limit). Except for rush hours, of course; personally, I am able to avoid those most of the time.
Ray

I rarely drive south of Capitol on 101, I take from 101 south to 680 to go home from work.
Actually I try not to follow closely, and that is why I always get other drivers cutting in front, and if I'm forced to slow down to make more space, and braking cancels the cruise control each time.
Sometimes I try to just decrease the speed of the cruise control, but often it's not enough for safety.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

I love my leaf ... however I've had it for 5 months now and from experience had to learn to adjust my driving style based on how far I need to go on that day, weekdays I usually do not have many unexpected trips , my commute is 22 miles plus maybe 5 miles of errands so 27 miles out of an 80% charge provides more than enough even with the most aggressive, carelessly inefficient driving I end up with 3-4 bars spare. On weekends when a destination is beyond 40 miles I drive very conservatively, on eco; climate on 70 degrees in summer, 60 degrees or off in winter, not going beyond 55mph and very very gentle grandma acceleration, this way I've achieved the highest of 70 miles from 100% charge with one bar left. I would never push it beyond that. I average 4 miles per KW on the car's dash. The car is proving good for 95% of my driving needs however I've had to learn to work with it's limitations.

The only way I see myself squeezing 100 miles out of it is by running on a flat road with no traffic lights at a constant 35 mph, no headwinds with 70 degree weather, no road I travel thru fit that scenario.

actually that scenario should get you closer to 120 miles. i did 100 miles this past winter in temps that ranged from mid 30's to mid 40's. it was close to half city driving which means a lot of stop and go which can kill your performance or enhance it depending on how you drive.

 

[madbrain]

You could try to bring up the charging display and see if the number of hours on 120V increments by one or two digits.

I tried it on my way home tonight, and the remaining charging time on 120V went from 7:00 to 8:00 for that last half mile uphill.

 

[surfingslovak]

You could try to bring up the charging display and see if the number of hours on 120V increments by one or two digits.

I tried it on my way home tonight, and the remaining charging time on 120V went from 7:00 to 8:00 for that last half mile uphill.

Oh, excellent! The granularity on that display is not that great, but based on this data point, it takes somewhere in the vicinity of 10 Gids to go up that hill. That's around 750 Wh or 3.5% of your usable battery capacity. Half a bar on the battery gauge. But it appears that you already knew that...

 

[dgpcolorado]

I doubt if ECO vs. D makes much difference on the freeway, at least in a mild climate like ours. I do use D myself most of the time on the freeway, because when I take my foot off the accelerator I slow more gradually.

Yes, D causes slowing to be more gradual, and that appears to make the most difference.

It is possible to slow more gradually in Eco just by backing off the A pedal slightly and using reduced regen braking; it isn't an "either/or" proposition. If you haven't already done so, try driving with the energy screen up on the console so that you can see how much power/regen you are using*. It is fairly easy to control slowing by slight adjustments to the pedal. No need to back all the way off the A pedal to slow unless you actually want maximum regen and need to cover the brake pedal for additional braking.

I think that part of the problem is that our ICE habits train us to back all the way off the "gas" when needing to slow. With an EV and decent regen—not that the LEAF has as much regen as I'd like—it is possible to drive "single-pedal" using the A pedal for both acceleration and braking. Takes some practice but it is fairly easy when you are used to it. This is one of the reasons that so many LEAF owners here drive in "Eco" most of the time: the extra regen allows single pedal driving, for the most part.


*Looking at the energy screen while in heavy traffic should be done carefully though; it would have been nice if they had put that pie-chart display in the "eyebrow" next to the speedometer.

 

[LEAFer]

IMHO ... the power/regen circles on the main dash (and more in driver's field of view) seem to be more responsive than the energy pie-charts on the center stack touch screen.

 

[dgpcolorado]

IMHO ... the power/regen circles on the main dash (and more in driver's field of view) seem to be more responsive than the energy pie-charts on the center stack touch screen.

One reason I like the pie chart on the console is that I can hold neutral without having to shift into neutral. The dots and rings are too coarse for useful feedback IMO. But once one gets used to the idea of single pedal driving a display isn't necessary.

The reason I mentioned it was because of the comments that there was too much regen slowing in Eco, which isn't true if the A pedal is used properly. The energy screen is a useful teaching tool, especially since it is calibrated in kW.