2016-2017 model year 30 kWh bar losers and capacity losses

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
specialgreen said:
johnlocke said:
If you plan to keep your car for 10 years better plan on at least one battery replacement out of your pocket(currently $8400 with exchange) unless you can live with 50% capacity.

When we're talking about battery life, please avoid exaggeration.

Either the battery degrades more than 20% in 8 years, or it doesn't. If it degrades slower, the worst case is that you hit 80% one day outside warranty, or just under 2.5% loss per year. After 10 years, you'd still have 75% SOH (not 50%).

If it degrades faster that 2.5% per year, then you will have a battery replaced under warranty before 8 years. If the initial battery was replaced after 4 years and 1 day (5% degradation per year), then the replacement battery may reach 80% after 8 years and 2 days (2 days out of warranty). At 5% loss per year, after an additional 2 years, you'd be down to 70% (not 50%).

If there were a group of customers needing two battery replacements under warranty, the worst-case would be 7.5% loss per year, such that the 3rd battery reaches 80% one day outside the 8-year warranty. In that case, after 10 years, the car has 65% SOH, not 50%.

For a customer with 3 replacements under warranty, worst-case has the 4th pack reaching 80% 1 day outside 8 years (10% loss per year). After ten years, you'd have 60%, not 50%.

Since actual loss is not linear, I could believe that customers who degraded to 80% in 2 years might degrade to 50% in 2 more years. But I believe the percentage of 30kwhr owners getting a new pack every 24 months is small (even before the firmware correction). The comment "if you plan to keep your car for 10 years... live with 50%" implies that 50% after 10 years is the general case. I don't see how that statement can possibly be accurate.
There are a couple of errors in your assumptions. First battery deterioration in a Leaf battery is closer to linear then an inverse log function. second, the losses for the 24 KWH battery in hot climates are on the order of 7-10% per year ( that is 7-10% of original capacity each year is lost). Hence the replacement under warranty in under 5 years. For the 30 KWH battery, the annual loss was closer to 15% a year. Hence the replacement of batteries in some cars in less than 2 1/2 years. Under that scenario, you could expect to replace the battery at least twice and possibly third time just before the warranty ran out. Nissan has updated the LBC firmware so we are essentially back to square one with Nissan claiming that the previous failures were essentially a math error. It will take a year or more to accumulate enough data points to see how well the battery holds up. As others have pointed out battery replacement will not occur until the battery is down to 65% of the original capacity or less ( 8 bars remaining) not 80% as you state. If the battery did indeed lose 2 1/2% per year, I would be quite happy.
 
johnlocke said:
There are a couple of errors in your assumptions. First battery deterioration in a Leaf battery is closer to linear then an inverse log function. second, the losses for the 24 KWH battery in hot climates are on the order of 7-10% per year ( that is 7-10% of original capacity each year is lost). Hence the replacement under warranty in under 5 years. For the 30 KWH battery, the annual loss was closer to 15% a year. Hence the replacement of batteries in some cars in less than 2 1/2 years. Under that scenario, you could expect to replace the battery at least twice and possibly third time just before the warranty ran out. Nissan has updated the LBC firmware so we are essentially back to square one with Nissan claiming that the previous failures were essentially a math error. It will take a year or more to accumulate enough data points to see how well the battery holds up. As others have pointed out battery replacement will not occur until the battery is down to 65% of the original capacity or less ( 8 bars remaining) not 80% as you state. If the battery did indeed lose 2 1/2% per year, I would be quite happy.
1+

My modest (or is that mediocre ?) understanding of chemistry and the models I have looked all expect a geometric degradation but like you I see zero order kinetics. I have no idea why, and I wish it was not so. Perhaps it is a non linear dynamic where the degradation products affect the degradation rate.
 
SageBrush said:
johnlocke said:
There are a couple of errors in your assumptions. First battery deterioration in a Leaf battery is closer to linear then an inverse log function. second, the losses for the 24 KWH battery in hot climates are on the order of 7-10% per year ( that is 7-10% of original capacity each year is lost). Hence the replacement under warranty in under 5 years. For the 30 KWH battery, the annual loss was closer to 15% a year. Hence the replacement of batteries in some cars in less than 2 1/2 years. Under that scenario, you could expect to replace the battery at least twice and possibly third time just before the warranty ran out. Nissan has updated the LBC firmware so we are essentially back to square one with Nissan claiming that the previous failures were essentially a math error. It will take a year or more to accumulate enough data points to see how well the battery holds up. As others have pointed out battery replacement will not occur until the battery is down to 65% of the original capacity or less ( 8 bars remaining) not 80% as you state. If the battery did indeed lose 2 1/2% per year, I would be quite happy.
1+

My modest (or is that mediocre ?) understanding of chemistry and the models I have looked all expect a geometric degradation but like you I see zero order kinetics. I have no idea why, and I wish it was not so. Perhaps it is a non linear dynamic where the degradation products affect the degradation rate.
My suspicion is that the battery experiences higher temperatures in the middle of the pack which accelerates the whole process. There have reports that the cells in the middle of the pack are less suitable for rebuilds and are more likely to be discarded. Most tests for battery life focus on a single cell with lots of air flow to keep the battery close to ambient. Also those tests tend to use a lower discharge rate (1/4 C or even 1/10 C) which cause less internal heat generation. I hope that Nissan has fixed the 30 KWH battery and would love to see the 2 1/2 % annual loss Nissan promised us (remember "80% at 8 yr/ 100,000 mi") but right now after 3 months of summer heat I appear to have lost about 1.5% which would put me at 5-6% annually. It's way too soon to say that these numbers are valid data points but that's all I have to go on. That number would put me at being down to 8 bars just after the warranty runs out. If the weather cools off and deterioration slows down with it, I might indeed see 2 1/2 or 3% annual loss. Time will tell.
 
johnlocke said:
That number would put me at being down to 8 bars just after the warranty runs out.
Which I contend is exactly what Nissan asked of the engineers for the middle, say, 80% of cars sold.
It is quite an accomplishment that Nissan was able to increase capacity from 24 to 30 kWh in the same volume *and* extend the warranty from five to eight years, but it is overshadowed by the low bar. By that I mean $30k for a car that offers 19 kWh range after 8 years is still piss poor value
 
WetEV said:
DaveinOlyWA said:
But the question remains whether I can get below 65% to get an exchange before 100,000 miles. This is the decision I have to make near the end of my 3 year lease. My residual ($9600_ is simply too low to not consider the possibility.

Watch the Phoenix LEAFs. And similar very hot places.

If they get significant numbers of battery replacements before 40k miles or so, you might have a chance. If half get replacements before 35k miles, about 50% chance.

If half of the Phoenix LEAFs get replacements just before 100k miles, then you would have a 50% chance of getting to 287k miles before loss of fourth bar. Would you keep the car that long?

Yeah, well I know one in Phoenix who will not even be close to replacement by 35,000 miles. In fact, she may not even have lost one bar by then.
 
johnlocke said:
specialgreen said:
johnlocke said:
If you plan to keep your car for 10 years better plan on at least one battery replacement out of your pocket(currently $8400 with exchange) unless you can live with 50% capacity.

When we're talking about battery life, please avoid exaggeration.

Either the battery degrades more than 20% in 8 years, or it doesn't. If it degrades slower, the worst case is that you hit 80% one day outside warranty, or just under 2.5% loss per year. After 10 years, you'd still have 75% SOH (not 50%).

If it degrades faster that 2.5% per year, then you will have a battery replaced under warranty before 8 years. If the initial battery was replaced after 4 years and 1 day (5% degradation per year), then the replacement battery may reach 80% after 8 years and 2 days (2 days out of warranty). At 5% loss per year, after an additional 2 years, you'd be down to 70% (not 50%).

If there were a group of customers needing two battery replacements under warranty, the worst-case would be 7.5% loss per year, such that the 3rd battery reaches 80% one day outside the 8-year warranty. In that case, after 10 years, the car has 65% SOH, not 50%.

For a customer with 3 replacements under warranty, worst-case has the 4th pack reaching 80% 1 day outside 8 years (10% loss per year). After ten years, you'd have 60%, not 50%.

Since actual loss is not linear, I could believe that customers who degraded to 80% in 2 years might degrade to 50% in 2 more years. But I believe the percentage of 30kwhr owners getting a new pack every 24 months is small (even before the firmware correction). The comment "if you plan to keep your car for 10 years... live with 50%" implies that 50% after 10 years is the general case. I don't see how that statement can possibly be accurate.
There are a couple of errors in your assumptions. First battery deterioration in a Leaf battery is closer to linear then an inverse log function. second, the losses for the 24 KWH battery in hot climates are on the order of 7-10% per year ( that is 7-10% of original capacity each year is lost). Hence the replacement under warranty in under 5 years. For the 30 KWH battery, the annual loss was closer to 15% a year. Hence the replacement of batteries in some cars in less than 2 1/2 years. Under that scenario, you could expect to replace the battery at least twice and possibly third time just before the warranty ran out. Nissan has updated the LBC firmware so we are essentially back to square one with Nissan claiming that the previous failures were essentially a math error. It will take a year or more to accumulate enough data points to see how well the battery holds up. As others have pointed out battery replacement will not occur until the battery is down to 65% of the original capacity or less ( 8 bars remaining) not 80% as you state. If the battery did indeed lose 2 1/2% per year, I would be quite happy.

You are one to talk about erroneous comments.

Even if degradation was linear, it would still accelerate due to lower capacity which is essentially a smaller pack working harder so maybe not logarithmic but hardly linear either.

The other thing is the "15% per year" comment. How long are we going to continue to kick the dead horse? It won't take a year to evaluate the pack. The evaluation literally begins the day of the update.

To this point; Has ANYONE reported regaining a bar to lose it rapidly?

To this point; Has anyone reported the same range as before the update, "definitively?"

If you have heard, let me know. I personally haven't. What I have heard is several people now taking trips after the update that they did not think possible before. They were all successful. A few had LEAF Spy so their evaluations of added range were quite quantitative.

In reality; if all things are equal. losing an average 10% on a 24 kwh pack would imply losing less simply due to static need being supplied by a larger pack. Less stress, less cycling. At least that is the theory.

But that is not reality and yes, Nissan did what it could to circumvent that. For many; 24 kwh was a small compromise that became a large one due to degradation. So moving to 30 kwh only allowed compromise to a lesser degree so no advantage of a larger pack. Sure we piled on more mileage, etc. But the durability was not better because we no longer had 80% charging.

Either way, MANY 30 kwh LEAFs were seeing noticeable degradation EVERYWHERE in well less than 6 months including someone in NW Oregon.

I guess we should know something in a few months if we are not already convinced since its already been a few months. There is no doubt that some will see heavy degradation. Phoenix won't be solved with software but we already knew that.
 
DaveinOlyWA said:
johnlocke said:
specialgreen said:
When we're talking about battery life, please avoid exaggeration.

Either the battery degrades more than 20% in 8 years, or it doesn't. If it degrades slower, the worst case is that you hit 80% one day outside warranty, or just under 2.5% loss per year. After 10 years, you'd still have 75% SOH (not 50%).

If it degrades faster that 2.5% per year, then you will have a battery replaced under warranty before 8 years. If the initial battery was replaced after 4 years and 1 day (5% degradation per year), then the replacement battery may reach 80% after 8 years and 2 days (2 days out of warranty). At 5% loss per year, after an additional 2 years, you'd be down to 70% (not 50%).

If there were a group of customers needing two battery replacements under warranty, the worst-case would be 7.5% loss per year, such that the 3rd battery reaches 80% one day outside the 8-year warranty. In that case, after 10 years, the car has 65% SOH, not 50%.

For a customer with 3 replacements under warranty, worst-case has the 4th pack reaching 80% 1 day outside 8 years (10% loss per year). After ten years, you'd have 60%, not 50%.

Since actual loss is not linear, I could believe that customers who degraded to 80% in 2 years might degrade to 50% in 2 more years. But I believe the percentage of 30kwhr owners getting a new pack every 24 months is small (even before the firmware correction). The comment "if you plan to keep your car for 10 years... live with 50%" implies that 50% after 10 years is the general case. I don't see how that statement can possibly be accurate.
There are a couple of errors in your assumptions. First battery deterioration in a Leaf battery is closer to linear then an inverse log function. second, the losses for the 24 KWH battery in hot climates are on the order of 7-10% per year ( that is 7-10% of original capacity each year is lost). Hence the replacement under warranty in under 5 years. For the 30 KWH battery, the annual loss was closer to 15% a year. Hence the replacement of batteries in some cars in less than 2 1/2 years. Under that scenario, you could expect to replace the battery at least twice and possibly third time just before the warranty ran out. Nissan has updated the LBC firmware so we are essentially back to square one with Nissan claiming that the previous failures were essentially a math error. It will take a year or more to accumulate enough data points to see how well the battery holds up. As others have pointed out battery replacement will not occur until the battery is down to 65% of the original capacity or less ( 8 bars remaining) not 80% as you state. If the battery did indeed lose 2 1/2% per year, I would be quite happy.

You are one to talk about erroneous comments.

Even if degradation was linear, it would still accelerate due to lower capacity which is essentially a smaller pack working harder so maybe not logarithmic but hardly linear either.

The other thing is the "15% per year" comment. How long are we going to continue to kick the dead horse? It won't take a year to evaluate the pack. The evaluation literally begins the day of the update.

To this point; Has ANYONE reported regaining a bar to lose it rapidly?

To this point; Has anyone reported the same range as before the update, "definitively?"

If you have heard, let me know. I personally haven't. What I have heard is several people now taking trips after the update that they did not think possible before. They were all successful. A few had LEAF Spy so their evaluations of added range were quite quantitative.

In reality; if all things are equal. losing an average 10% on a 24 kwh pack would imply losing less simply due to static need being supplied by a larger pack. Less stress, less cycling. At least that is the theory.

But that is not reality and yes, Nissan did what it could to circumvent that. For many; 24 kwh was a small compromise that became a large one due to degradation. So moving to 30 kwh only allowed compromise to a lesser degree so no advantage of a larger pack. Sure we piled on more mileage, etc. But the durability was not better because we no longer had 80% charging.

Either way, MANY 30 kwh LEAFs were seeing noticeable degradation EVERYWHERE in well less than 6 months including someone in NW Oregon.

I guess we should know something in a few months if we are not already convinced since its already been a few months. There is no doubt that some will see heavy degradation. Phoenix won't be solved with software but we already knew that.
And your point is? You do make a good point that as range is lost charging does become more frequent. And that changing the battery size to 30 KWH didn't change charging habits because people just drove the cars on longer trips. That could explain why the deterioration appears to linear rather than a flattening curve as many expected.

In a forum where people obsess over the rolling resistance of tires or which way to mount mudflaps, why haven't we heard of nearly magical increases in range after the LBC mod? The few reports I have seen are on the order of "eh, I think it might have helped". Reports of changes in the SOH from LeafSpy have not been accompanied by reports of an increase in range. In the case Nissan's capacity bars, Nissan has been very good about obfuscating what they actually mean or what values they represent. The first bar doesn't drop until you hit 80-83%(ymmv) so it's not likely that people are going see that bar drop unless they were already 3 bars down to start with. Part of the problem is that the mod is recent and not everyone has taken advantage of it.
 
This is true and the reality is most didn't know what there range was before the update. Without LEAF Spy, they simply used only what the LEAF displayed so anything after VLB was "unusable" to "not reliable" enough to risk. This is the reason why the GOM is their chief indicator of range or lack thereof... :shock:
 
DaveinOlyWA said:
johnlocke said:
specialgreen said:
When we're talking about battery life, please avoid exaggeration.

Either the battery degrades more than 20% in 8 years, or it doesn't. If it degrades slower, the worst case is that you hit 80% one day outside warranty, or just under 2.5% loss per year. After 10 years, you'd still have 75% SOH (not 50%).

If it degrades faster that 2.5% per year, then you will have a battery replaced under warranty before 8 years. If the initial battery was replaced after 4 years and 1 day (5% degradation per year), then the replacement battery may reach 80% after 8 years and 2 days (2 days out of warranty). At 5% loss per year, after an additional 2 years, you'd be down to 70% (not 50%).

If there were a group of customers needing two battery replacements under warranty, the worst-case would be 7.5% loss per year, such that the 3rd battery reaches 80% one day outside the 8-year warranty. In that case, after 10 years, the car has 65% SOH, not 50%.

For a customer with 3 replacements under warranty, worst-case has the 4th pack reaching 80% 1 day outside 8 years (10% loss per year). After ten years, you'd have 60%, not 50%.

Since actual loss is not linear, I could believe that customers who degraded to 80% in 2 years might degrade to 50% in 2 more years. But I believe the percentage of 30kwhr owners getting a new pack every 24 months is small (even before the firmware correction). The comment "if you plan to keep your car for 10 years... live with 50%" implies that 50% after 10 years is the general case. I don't see how that statement can possibly be accurate.
There are a couple of errors in your assumptions. First battery deterioration in a Leaf battery is closer to linear then an inverse log function. second, the losses for the 24 KWH battery in hot climates are on the order of 7-10% per year ( that is 7-10% of original capacity each year is lost). Hence the replacement under warranty in under 5 years. For the 30 KWH battery, the annual loss was closer to 15% a year. Hence the replacement of batteries in some cars in less than 2 1/2 years. Under that scenario, you could expect to replace the battery at least twice and possibly third time just before the warranty ran out. Nissan has updated the LBC firmware so we are essentially back to square one with Nissan claiming that the previous failures were essentially a math error. It will take a year or more to accumulate enough data points to see how well the battery holds up. As others have pointed out battery replacement will not occur until the battery is down to 65% of the original capacity or less ( 8 bars remaining) not 80% as you state. If the battery did indeed lose 2 1/2% per year, I would be quite happy.

You are one to talk about erroneous comments.

Even if degradation was linear, it would still accelerate due to lower capacity which is essentially a smaller pack working harder so maybe not logarithmic but hardly linear either.

The other thing is the "15% per year" comment. How long are we going to continue to kick the dead horse? It won't take a year to evaluate the pack. The evaluation literally begins the day of the update.

To this point; Has ANYONE reported regaining a bar to lose it rapidly?

To this point; Has anyone reported the same range as before the update, "definitively?"

If you have heard, let me know. I personally haven't. What I have heard is several people now taking trips after the update that they did not think possible before. They were all successful. A few had LEAF Spy so their evaluations of added range were quite quantitative.

In reality; if all things are equal. losing an average 10% on a 24 kwh pack would imply losing less simply due to static need being supplied by a larger pack. Less stress, less cycling. At least that is the theory.

But that is not reality and yes, Nissan did what it could to circumvent that. For many; 24 kwh was a small compromise that became a large one due to degradation. So moving to 30 kwh only allowed compromise to a lesser degree so no advantage of a larger pack. Sure we piled on more mileage, etc. But the durability was not better because we no longer had 80% charging.

Either way, MANY 30 kwh LEAFs were seeing noticeable degradation EVERYWHERE in well less than 6 months including someone in NW Oregon.

I guess we should know something in a few months if we are not already convinced since its already been a few months. There is no doubt that some will see heavy degradation. Phoenix won't be solved with software but we already knew that.

My sister has. She bought a used 2016 with 4 bars lost back in early July (I encouraged her to, with the expectation that she'd get a new battery before the warranty expired). Got the BMS updated near the end of July, which only restored 3 of the 4 bars. She was seeing much improved range (from what it was at 4 bars down). Then in mid August, she lost her 2nd bar. Will need to take a leafSpy reading to see when we can expect to see the 3rd bar to disappear.
 
Oils4AsphaultOnly said:
DaveinOlyWA said:
johnlocke said:

My sister has. She bought a used 2016 with 4 bars lost back in early July (I encouraged her to, with the expectation that she'd get a new battery before the warranty expired). Got the BMS updated near the end of July, which only restored 3 of the 4 bars. She was seeing much improved range (from what it was at 4 bars down). Then in mid August, she lost her 2nd bar. Will need to take a leafSpy reading to see when we can expect to see the 3rd bar to disappear.
I'd be very interested to hear the results on that. Also, any estimates on how much her range improved. In any case, with two bars down already she should qualify for a replacement battery soon. two bars down should put her at 73-75% SOH. She only needs to lose 10% more to qualify for a new battery and has 5 years to do it.
 
johnlocke said:
Oils4AsphaultOnly said:
DaveinOlyWA said:
My sister has. She bought a used 2016 with 4 bars lost back in early July (I encouraged her to, with the expectation that she'd get a new battery before the warranty expired). Got the BMS updated near the end of July, which only restored 3 of the 4 bars. She was seeing much improved range (from what it was at 4 bars down). Then in mid August, she lost her 2nd bar. Will need to take a leafSpy reading to see when we can expect to see the 3rd bar to disappear.
I'd be very interested to hear the results on that. Also, any estimates on how much her range improved. In any case, with two bars down already she should qualify for a replacement battery soon. two bars down should put her at 73-75% SOH. She only needs to lose 10% more to qualify for a new battery and has 5 years to do it.

Interestingly enough, she's at 77.73% SOH

@ SOC 56.3% - 61.78 AHr, 369.80V, 51.06% Hx

She told me that she recently changed her charging behaviour (used to QC near starbucks every other day), so that SOH might've gone up these past few weeks.
 
Oils4AsphaultOnly said:
johnlocke said:
I'd be very interested to hear the results on that. Also, any estimates on how much her range improved. In any case, with two bars down already she should qualify for a replacement battery soon. two bars down should put her at 73-75% SOH. She only needs to lose 10% more to qualify for a new battery and has 5 years to do it.

Interestingly enough, she's at 77.73% SOH

@ SOC 56.3% - 61.78 AHr, 369.80V, 51.06% Hx

She told me that she recently changed her charging behaviour (used to QC near starbucks every other day), so that SOH might've gone up these past few weeks.
If she was only QC'ing before, the battery wouldn't have time to balance the cells. I'd advise her to to do a level 2 at least once a week just to balance the battery. If she's now at 77.73%, did she get the second bar back?
 
johnlocke said:
Oils4AsphaultOnly said:
johnlocke said:
I'd be very interested to hear the results on that. Also, any estimates on how much her range improved. In any case, with two bars down already she should qualify for a replacement battery soon. two bars down should put her at 73-75% SOH. She only needs to lose 10% more to qualify for a new battery and has 5 years to do it.

Interestingly enough, she's at 77.73% SOH

@ SOC 56.3% - 61.78 AHr, 369.80V, 51.06% Hx

She told me that she recently changed her charging behaviour (used to QC near starbucks every other day), so that SOH might've gone up these past few weeks.
If she was only QC'ing before, the battery wouldn't have time to balance the cells. I'd advise her to to do a level 2 at least once a week just to balance the battery. If she's now at 77.73%, did she get the second bar back?

Nope, second bar is still gone.

Edit: I helped her install a L5-20 (240v) circuit last month, so she's been charging L2 exclusively since then. She drives 60 miles daily, but in traffic, so ends up with 30% remaining charge.
 
Looks like the battery is close to its original range at 23,000 miles.
Drove from full charge on L2 to 10% SOC Leaf Spy 106 miles. 36 mile trip in the afternoon. 4.1 mi/kWh on a 70 mile airport run in the evening with the defroster on. Three people and luggage to go and just me back.
It is a black car and never garaged with brand new OEM Ecopia tires set to door sticker pressures.
When I do the run again in reverse I will clean the windows so the defroster won’t be needed and will add some more PSI and see if I do better.
 
I have 2016 Leaf with 30 KWH Battery. Last week I got 8 bars left on battery so took it to the dealer.
Dealer upgraded the Firmware per the last Leaf Recall and which increased the bar to 10.
So I did not get a new battery. But the firmware did not update battery capacity.
This morning I was at 100% and after driving for around 25 miles, I was at 60% Battery.
What are my options to get a new battery as I cannot commute to work with this capacity anymore.

I live in Phoenix. Are there any other Phoenix Leaf Users? May be we can start a separate thread. If we have enough data, we can get into litigation for Arizona Leaf Owners.
 
vthokia said:
I have 2016 Leaf with 30 KWH Battery. Last week I got 8 bars left on battery so took it to the dealer.
Dealer upgraded the Firmware per the last Leaf Recall and which increased the bar to 10.
So I did not get a new battery. But the firmware did not update battery capacity.
This morning I was at 100% and after driving for around 25 miles, I was at 60% Battery.
What are my options to get a new battery as I cannot commute to work with this capacity anymore.

I live in Phoenix. Are there any other Phoenix Leaf Users? May be we can start a separate thread. If we have enough data, we can get into litigation for Arizona Leaf Owners.

don't know if litigation will do you any good, but at 10 bars, you're not too far off from re-qualifying for the replacement.

As for not being able to commute with that capacity, how were you able to commute when it first lost the 4th bar? You should still get roughly the same range (assuming your driving style and weather didn't change significantly) as when you had lost 3 bars.
 
vthokia said:
This morning I was at 100% and after driving for around 25 miles, I was at 60% Battery.
What are my options to get a new battery as I cannot commute to work with this capacity anymore.
A new 30 kWh LEAF has about 28 kWh usable, and at 10 bars you should have no less than 28*0.7 = 19.6 kWh usable.

If your range really is 62.5 miles then your consumption is ~ 3 miles per kWh.
Fix that. It is probably the nut behind the steering wheel* but check your tyres.

* Nut fixes:
Stop driving aggressively
Slow down
Take it easy with A/C. Learn to use ventilation, shade, and sun shades to advantage.
Stay more comfortable in the heat with ice water
Use seat heaters instead of cabin heating in the cold
 
Oils4AsphaultOnly said:
vthokia said:
I have 2016 Leaf with 30 KWH Battery. Last week I got 8 bars left on battery so took it to the dealer.
Dealer upgraded the Firmware per the last Leaf Recall and which increased the bar to 10.
So I did not get a new battery. But the firmware did not update battery capacity.
This morning I was at 100% and after driving for around 25 miles, I was at 60% Battery.
What are my options to get a new battery as I cannot commute to work with this capacity anymore.

I live in Phoenix. Are there any other Phoenix Leaf Users? May be we can start a separate thread. If we have enough data, we can get into litigation for Arizona Leaf Owners.

don't know if litigation will do you any good, but at 10 bars, you're not too far off from re-qualifying for the replacement.


As for not being able to commute with that capacity, how were you able to commute when it first lost the 4th bar? You should still get roughly the same range (assuming your driving style and weather didn't change significantly) as when you had lost 3 bars.


I believe they have changed the Algorithm to calculate the Capacity Bars with their latest BMS Update. So it is going to take much longer to loose that 4th bar. I am going to call them Today and ask if I can get the information on that change.

I was taking internal roads and avoid freeways, that helped. I was expecting that after I loose the 4th bar, I will get a new battery.
 
SageBrush said:
vthokia said:
This morning I was at 100% and after driving for around 25 miles, I was at 60% Battery.
What are my options to get a new battery as I cannot commute to work with this capacity anymore.
A new 30 kWh LEAF has about 28 kWh usable, and at 10 bars you should have no less than 28*0.7 = 19.6 kWh usable.

If your range really is 62.5 miles then your consumption is ~ 3 miles per kWh.
Fix that. It is probably the nut behind the steering wheel* but check your tyres.

* Nut fixes:
Stop driving aggressively
Slow down
Take it easy with A/C. Learn to use ventilation, shade, and sun shades to advantage.
Stay more comfortable in the heat with ice water
Use seat heaters instead of cabin heating in the cold

I am actually very responsible driver. Didn't get any ticket in last 10 years. I live in Phoenix so can't do anything about A/C.
 
vthokia said:
Oils4AsphaultOnly said:
vthokia said:
I have 2016 Leaf with 30 KWH Battery. Last week I got 8 bars left on battery so took it to the dealer.
Dealer upgraded the Firmware per the last Leaf Recall and which increased the bar to 10.
So I did not get a new battery. But the firmware did not update battery capacity.
This morning I was at 100% and after driving for around 25 miles, I was at 60% Battery.
What are my options to get a new battery as I cannot commute to work with this capacity anymore.

I live in Phoenix. Are there any other Phoenix Leaf Users? May be we can start a separate thread. If we have enough data, we can get into litigation for Arizona Leaf Owners.

don't know if litigation will do you any good, but at 10 bars, you're not too far off from re-qualifying for the replacement.


As for not being able to commute with that capacity, how were you able to commute when it first lost the 4th bar? You should still get roughly the same range (assuming your driving style and weather didn't change significantly) as when you had lost 3 bars.


I believe they have changed the Algorithm to calculate the Capacity Bars with their latest BMS Update. So it is going to take much longer to loose that 4th bar. I am going to call them Today and ask if I can get the information on that change.

I was taking internal roads and avoid freeways, that helped. I was expecting that after I loose the 4th bar, I will get a new battery.

Not true.

**The BMS was not updated. It was the LBC

**The forth bar will disappear on the same schedule it was "supposed" to disappear before.
 
Back
Top