Nissan vs others battery capacity degradation

It is well known here on the forum that many Leafs are losing more than 30% battery capacity in 5 years/ 60,000 miles. Even the new 2016 30kWh battery with it's more optimum NMC chemistry seems to be off to a shaky start with a few owners reporting sub par capacity already. Whereas there are Teslas with their huge, expensive , liquid cooled and heated batteries that have over 60,000 miles (and twice that) showing almost 0% loss. It seems that Leaf 2 will have to forego the price advantage of air cooling. Or Nissan can continue to promote the cheaper option with it's aggressive warranty replacement policy. Is it also the small format cylindrical cell construction used in the Teslas that allows them to last longer since no part of the cell is more than 9mm away from the liquid coolant? It will be interesting to see how well the packs hold up in the Bolt which will outsell them both for the next couple of years.
.
https://electrek.co/2016/06/06/tesla-model-s-battery-pack-data-degradation/
.
.

.
.

.
.
.
.

The Volt batteries seem to be holding up with little to no loss as well - at least from what I've gotten from the people I've talked to on a Volt board that I frequent and other reviews that I've read. That is one of the reasons why I was leaning towards a Volt over the Leaf, but given how ridiculously cheap used Leafs are (there are tons of 14's in my area for around $7500 and even a '15 I just found for $10K), I'm tempted to take a chance on one of those since they still have most of their warranty. Frankly, if Chevy can sell the Volt and Bolt (which also uses liquid cooling unless I'm mistaken) for about the same price as the Leaf, I don't see why Nissan cannot switch over to a liquid cooled system. It would seem cheaper in the long run to use a system that gives a more stable battery life rather than having to keep replacing people's batteries due to lost capacity.

The Volt has an engine, and it is programmed to start after a maximum of 38-45 miles on the battery. The Leaf depends on the battery 100% of the time. It is beyond comprehension why anyone would compare the two with a straight face.

Even the big batteries in the Tesla degrade. Yes, they are bigger, so if you bounce it around town you will not notice it when compared to the Leaf.

Jedlacks said:

The Volt has an engine, and it is programmed to start after a maximum of 38-45 miles on the battery. The Leaf depends on the battery 100% of the time. It is beyond comprehension why anyone would compare the two with a straight face.

Even the big batteries in the Tesla degrade. Yes, they are bigger, so if you bounce it around town you will not notice it when compared to the Leaf.

Click to expand...

It has an engine/generator to provide range extension, but it is still designed to operate in pure electric mode and has a battery pack to facilitate that - hence the comparison.

Jedlacks said:

Even the big batteries in the Tesla degrade. Yes, they are bigger, so if you bounce it around town you will not notice it when compared to the Leaf.

Click to expand...

Right. The Tesla batteries are showing about 8% loss at 100,000 miles. The Leaf, 30% loss at 60,000.

tattoogunman said:

Jedlacks said:

The Volt has an engine, and it is programmed to start after a maximum of 38-45 miles on the battery. The Leaf depends on the battery 100% of the time. It is beyond comprehension why anyone would compare the two with a straight face.

Even the big batteries in the Tesla degrade. Yes, they are bigger, so if you bounce it around town you will not notice it when compared to the Leaf.

Click to expand...

It has an engine/generator to provide range extension, but it is still designed to operate in pure electric mode and has a battery pack to facilitate that - hence the comparison.

Click to expand...

PHEVs and hybrids are typically designed with battery buffers much larger than a BEV. I would not try to compare BEV to *HEV.

For the same reason I guess it is really not fair to compare a 100kWh battery to a 24kWh battery. For a Tesla to travel 100,000 miles, It's trips will rarely need to use even 80% of the available capacity. So it can more usually stay in the middle. Charging to 80% and never going below 20%. Which extends battery life the same way the Volt does. By keeping the state of charge in the gentle part of the curve. And the huge Tesla battery will rarely charge or discharge at rates above .5C. And 100,000 miles is only 400 gentle cycles to that big battery whereas the Leaf will cycle deeper to make 60,000 miles in 750 cycles while seeing occasional discharges at 2C.
.
Still, it seems like losing 30% in 750 cycles could be better. And doing it in 300 cycles just because the car was parked in a hot parking lot it is a good thing Nissan stepped up and offered a give away price on battery exchanges.

sendler2112 said:

Jedlacks said:

Even the big batteries in the Tesla degrade. Yes, they are bigger, so if you bounce it around town you will not notice it when compared to the Leaf.

Click to expand...

Right. The Tesla batteries are showing about 8% loss at 100,000 miles. The Leaf, 30% loss at 60,000.

Click to expand...

Well, I not an experienced leaf owner but did a lot of research on the leaf before we bought one. From what I have read this 30 percent may be true for high temp markets but is not indicative of average losses on cooler climates...which is for the leaf market a considerable size. Most of Europe, Mid to northern US states, obviously Canada where we live. Britain. I question wether that 30 percent number is indicative of the average leaf.

sendler2112 said:

For the same reason I guess it is really not fair to compare a 100kWh battery to a 24kWh battery. ...

Click to expand...

I think the comparison is valid, it is just that you identify the differences and decided if any of those differences are part of the reason for the difference in results.

For example, you can find Teslas that drive hundreds 60,000 miles/year (mailman in Northern MN for one), yet aren't anywhere close to 30% degradation.

The lower SOC band is certainly a factor, as is the liquid cooling/heating system.
The cell shape and chemistry may be other contributing factors.

How does Nissan's battery compare to other BEVs with a similar sized battery? Has there been that much degradation with the FFE or The Chevy Spark EV?

degradation without reference to time is not a valid argument.

all batteries will degrade over time no matter what the chemistry or TMS used. Its easy to cite a Tesla going 100,000 miles simply because its battery size allows it do so in a short period of time. Your comment no doubt is about the Tesla used as a taxi or such that put on a lot of miles but did so in barely a year.

Also your comment of 30% loss in 60,000 miles references the extreme. There are several LEAFs well over the mileage with half the degradation but again, its primarily because the car was driven far in shorter periods of time.

We have a guy in a LEAF that has over 80,000 miles and less than 15% degradation (since he still has all his capacity bars)

It's hard to find much about the other EV's. Very few on the road and even fewer with drivers that can really give an accurate report since there doesn't seem to be any kind of Leafspy device. I found 1 good post on the Spark that shows a loss of 15% at 22,000 miles.
.
http://www.mychevysparkev.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=4464&start=20#wrapheader
.

An interesting peek inside the packs.
.
https://cleantechnica.com/2016/01/06/a-tale-of-3-battery-packs/
.

DaveinOlyWA said:

Your comment no doubt is about the Tesla used as a taxi or such that put on a lot of miles but did so in barely a year.

Click to expand...

Look at the link. This is not "a" Tesla. There are hundreds of respondents. All but a very few of which (the P60's) are falling right on the same curve. But it is obviously a much more deluxe system.