SageBrush
Posts: 1498
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: Colorado

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

Mon Nov 20, 2017 4:31 pm

GRA wrote:
SageBrush wrote:
RichCapeCod wrote:Ebeighe, that's pretty disheartening! Would you have been better off with the Bolt and its battery temperature control system? Hindsight being 20-20 and all!

Rich

Bolt battery degradation is unknown, and the GM warranty replacement at under 60% capacity is nothing to swoon over.

OTOH, GM/LG Chem does have a excellent track record with the Volt and its active TMS

There is a whole lot of inferences and hope there:

That the Volt PHEV record translates to the Bolt
That the Volt battery health is even real. Those owners do not monitor battery degradation. The best they know is that range has remained the same for a couple of years, but they do not know if the battery reserve is being consumed.
2013 Model 'S' with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California with 63.9 Ahr after 22k miles
Car is now enjoying an easy life in Colorado

jbuntz
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 5:41 am
Delivery Date: 17 Dec 2016
Leaf Number: 303765
Location: New Braunfels, TX

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

Mon Nov 20, 2017 6:24 pm

ebeighe wrote:This thread will soon have 1,000 posts. Lots of noise.

Anyway, thought I would report in on my 2017 Leaf S purchased 7/27/2017. Built 04/17. I'm in Phoenix but it was shipped in from Oregon, from what I understand soon prior to my purchase (there were running a 10K deal here in July); in other words, I don't believe it was sitting around here this summer before i bought it.

I have an openevse and mostly charge it to, say, 65% when it runs down to 30%. I've charged it to 100% a few times...
I never let it sit around at high charge.

It doesn't get driven at highway / high speeds very much, just a few miles at time a few times a week. The battery temp gauge doesn't get particularly high. I think it went to 9 bars once. We just have very high average temps.

Here's the report from LeafSpy when i first got Leafspy, and the most recent:

Code: Select all

08/06/2017
Odo 292
AHr 80.847   
SOH 100%   
Hx 96.6

11/17/2017
Odo 2727.2
Ahr 70.348   
SOH 88%   
Hx 84.95   
ok I take back my earlier comments that there was an early batch of bad batteries.
Mfg 11/15 Del 12/16 TX 2016 SL 30kWh,
30 Apr 2017 5175 mi 324 GID Ahr 70.75 SOH 89% Hx 85.31% kWh 25.1
11 Aug 2017 11 bar 9245 mi 282 GID Ahr 61.68 SOH 77% Hx 75.83% kWh 21.9
21 Oct 2017 10 bars 12000 mi 260 GID Ahr 57.22 SOH 71% Hx 70.58% kWh 20.2

GRA
Posts: 7584
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

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

Mon Nov 20, 2017 6:45 pm

SageBrush wrote:
GRA wrote:
SageBrush wrote:Bolt battery degradation is unknown, and the GM warranty replacement at under 60% capacity is nothing to swoon over.

OTOH, GM/LG Chem does have a excellent track record with the Volt and its active TMS

There is a whole lot of inferences and hope there:

That the Volt PHEV record translates to the Bolt
That the Volt battery health is even real. Those owners do not monitor battery degradation. The best they know is that range has remained the same for a couple of years, but they do not know if the battery reserve is being consumed.

They don't care, because GM was smart enough to hide capacity so that there's no degradation apparent to the user for several years. I just wish other companies had taken the same approach.

As to whether the Volt's record will translate to the Bolt, it's just as likely that its NMC with active TMS will, as AESC's without TMS will on the 2018 LEAF. And while there are undoubtedly differences between a PHEV's battery chemistry (as they are to some extent power batteries) and a BEV's (energy battery), with a PHEV battery that size it's likely they are more similar than different. The Bolt will also, in most cases, be using a smaller % of its capacity on a daily basis compared to a PHEV. And just in case the Bolt's battery doesn't prove to be durable, the Bolt comes with a warranty giving hard values, unlike the LEAF (so far). Given the available evidence, I know which one I'd trust more.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

SageBrush
Posts: 1498
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: Colorado

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

Mon Nov 20, 2017 8:46 pm

GRA wrote:
SageBrush wrote:
GRA wrote:OTOH, GM/LG Chem does have a excellent track record with the Volt and its active TMS

There is a whole lot of inferences and hope there:

That the Volt PHEV record translates to the Bolt
That the Volt battery health is even real. Those owners do not monitor battery degradation. The best they know is that range has remained the same for a couple of years, but they do not know if the battery reserve is being consumed.

They don't care, because GM was smart enough to hide capacity so that there's no degradation apparent to the user for several years.

Sure, but it means that significant battery degradation may have occurred and the Volt owners are none the wiser. That will not be the case in the Bolt
2013 Model 'S' with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California with 63.9 Ahr after 22k miles
Car is now enjoying an easy life in Colorado

johnlocke
Posts: 178
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2016 3:47 pm
Delivery Date: 14 Dec 2015
Leaf Number: 300582

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

Mon Nov 20, 2017 10:26 pm

GRA wrote:
SageBrush wrote:
GRA wrote:OTOH, GM/LG Chem does have a excellent track record with the Volt and its active TMS

There is a whole lot of inferences and hope there:

That the Volt PHEV record translates to the Bolt
That the Volt battery health is even real. Those owners do not monitor battery degradation. The best they know is that range has remained the same for a couple of years, but they do not know if the battery reserve is being consumed.

They don't care, because GM was smart enough to hide capacity so that there's no degradation apparent to the user for several years. I just wish other companies had taken the same approach.

As to whether the Volt's record will translate to the Bolt, it's just as likely that its NMC with active TMS will, as AESC's without TMS will on the 2018 LEAF. And while there are undoubtedly differences between a PHEV's battery chemistry (as they are to some extent power batteries) and a BEV's (energy battery), with a PHEV battery that size it's likely they are more similar than different. The Bolt will also, in most cases, be using a smaller % of its capacity on a daily basis compared to a PHEV. And just in case the Bolt's battery doesn't prove to be durable, the Bolt comes with a warranty giving hard values, unlike the LEAF (so far). Given the available evidence, I know which one I'd trust more.

Nissan did the same thing for us. Why do you think the first bar doesn't drop until you hit 80% on the 16's and 17's? Most Leaf drivers don't use Leaf Spy. Until that first bar drops, they don't have a clue except that they don't have quite as much range anymore if they even notice it at all.
2016 SV
Jamul, CA
San Diego East County

GRA
Posts: 7584
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

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

Tue Nov 21, 2017 6:30 pm

SageBrush wrote:
GRA wrote:
SageBrush wrote:There is a whole lot of inferences and hope there:

That the Volt PHEV record translates to the Bolt
That the Volt battery health is even real. Those owners do not monitor battery degradation. The best they know is that range has remained the same for a couple of years, but they do not know if the battery reserve is being consumed.

They don't care, because GM was smart enough to hide capacity so that there's no degradation apparent to the user for several years.

Sure, but it means that significant battery degradation may have occurred and the Volt owners are none the wiser. That will not be the case in the Bolt

Certainly, but with a warranty based on hard numbers, a liquid cooled TMS, and a much longer range to start, is there currently any other semi-affordable BEV besides Tesla that's likely to still be usable for most people's commute when the pack's eight or ten years old? 238 x .6 = 142.8, which is to say that even with a battery ready for warranty replacement, it's still going to have about as much range as the 2018 LEAF does when brand new, and there's no doubt which one's going to suffer greater degradation due to heat.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

GRA
Posts: 7584
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

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

Tue Nov 21, 2017 6:35 pm

johnlocke wrote:
GRA wrote:They don't care, because GM was smart enough to hide capacity so that there's no degradation apparent to the user for several years. I just wish other companies had taken the same approach.

As to whether the Volt's record will translate to the Bolt, it's just as likely that its NMC with active TMS will, as AESC's without TMS will on the 2018 LEAF. And while there are undoubtedly differences between a PHEV's battery chemistry (as they are to some extent power batteries) and a BEV's (energy battery), with a PHEV battery that size it's likely they are more similar than different. The Bolt will also, in most cases, be using a smaller % of its capacity on a daily basis compared to a PHEV. And just in case the Bolt's battery doesn't prove to be durable, the Bolt comes with a warranty giving hard values, unlike the LEAF (so far). Given the available evidence, I know which one I'd trust more.

Nissan did the same thing for us. Why do you think the first bar doesn't drop until you hit 80% on the 16's and 17's? Most Leaf drivers don't use Leaf Spy. Until that first bar drops, they don't have a clue except that they don't have quite as much range anymore if they even notice it at all.

It's not the same thing. NIssan hides degradation on the bars while the usable capacity and range continually decrease. GM hid extra capacity that is only accessed to retain the original usable capacity, so the owner doesn't experience any range loss for years. The latter method's much more conservative (and more expensive), but it has kept the Volt's customers a lot more satisfied than Nissan's approach has kept LEAF customers.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

SageBrush
Posts: 1498
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2011 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 13 Feb 2017
Location: Colorado

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

Tue Nov 21, 2017 8:19 pm

GRA wrote:
SageBrush wrote:
GRA wrote:They don't care, because GM was smart enough to hide capacity so that there's no degradation apparent to the user for several years.

Sure, but it means that significant battery degradation may have occurred and the Volt owners are none the wiser. That will not be the case in the Bolt

Certainly, but with a warranty based on hard numbers, a liquid cooled TMS, and a much longer range to start, is there currently any other semi-affordable BEV besides Tesla that's likely to still be usable for most people's commute when the pack's eight or ten years old? 238 x .6 = 142.8, which is to say that even with a battery ready for warranty replacement, it's still going to have about as much range as the 2018 LEAF does when brand new, and there's no doubt which one's going to suffer greater degradation due to heat.

If the Bolt is bought to carry out LEAF range type tasks then you are right, but if it is bought to carry out 200 mile range type tasks then unexpected, early degradation down to 60% of new is a problem.

Which brings us back to my point: we don't know yet if the Bolt will be good for a long run of time, and the Volt does not really inform us one way or another.
2013 Model 'S' with QC & rear-view camera
Bought off-lease Jan 2017 from N. California with 63.9 Ahr after 22k miles
Car is now enjoying an easy life in Colorado

User avatar
LTLFTcomposite
Posts: 4351
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 6:06 pm
Delivery Date: 10 Dec 2011
Leaf Number: 5926
Location: Boca Raton FL

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

Tue Nov 21, 2017 9:50 pm

Still, GM has earned some trust in this area and one could justify giving them the benefit of the doubt until problems become apparent. Nissan is deserving of the exact opposite, until they sell something that's shown to hold up over time I'm inclined to assume it's another fail, particularly in the absence of TMS which most everyone agrees is required to protect these batteries.
LTL
White 2012 SV delivered 10 Dec 2011 returned 25 Nov 2014 replaced with stopgap ICE Sentra
[35 months] [35K miles] [9 Bars]
2013 Volt replaced after 36 months/30k miles with ICE Rogue

DaveinOlyWA
Posts: 12336
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:43 pm
Delivery Date: 10 Nov 2016
Leaf Number: 314199
Location: Olympia, WA
Contact: Website

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

Tue Nov 21, 2017 9:54 pm

well reports from Bolt owners it would appear that the Bolt pack is not allowed as deep a discharge as the LEAF pack and that alone will enhance longevity. I think advertising usable range is probably something Chevy decided would mask any true degradation since at this point we can only speculate on how big the Bolt pack really is. I have seen several speculative numbers and it seems like 67 kwh seems to be the accepted capacity.
2011 SL; 44,598 miles. 2013 S; 44,840 miles.2016 S30 (build 10/2016)"low water marks" 27,000 miles.363GID Ahr 79.13Hx95.17%kwh28.1QCs238,L2's 251
My Blog; http://daveinolywa.blogspot.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Return to “Problems / Troubleshooting”