User avatar
dgpcolorado
Posts: 2973
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 1:56 pm
Delivery Date: 15 Dec 2011
Location: The Western Slope, Colorado

Re: I Beat EPA's 73 Mile Range : Report your experience

Fri Sep 26, 2014 8:31 am

kikngas wrote:Only had my 2015S a week, but so far, showing avg 4.6-4.7mi/kWh, and GOM seems to consistently equal %SOC. So that comes pretty close to the 21 usable kWh I believe folks were seeing on prior model years.
You might take your car down to Low Battery Warning (LBW: yellow charge symbol lights up and GOM starts flashing), and then Very Low Battery Warning (VLBW: GOM goes to flashing ---). It would be interesting to know the %SOC at which those transitions take place in a 2015. The rule of thumb for older LEAFs was that VLBW to turtle is about half the miles that you get from LBW to VLBW, under similar driving conditions, so you should have plenty of reserve miles below VLBW to get to a charge station.

Just taking the car to VLBW is a useful exercise for any LEAF driver since it helps to become comfortable with using the lower part of the battery, should it ever be necessary.
I've got a very low traffic, very flat, roughly 5mi loop around my home. I believe I've read that the battery performance actually improves the first few weeks of use. And with current weather, I've never seen other than 5 temp bars. When would be the ideal time to attempt a 200 mile charge?
For trying to see what the maximum range of the car is, you will likely get the best results at the hottest outside temperatures and very slow speeds (12 - 15 mph, although 25 mph should also be good for stretching range). Wind, rain, and cool air all lower range.
I've also got a rather long, steep (by MN standards) hill nearby where one could attempt some sort of regen efficiency test. Is it accurate to say that if you regen from 50 to 5 (and then brake to zero with no regen bubbles showing) that you will be going 35 or 40 again by the time you burn what you recaptured?
I tend to assume that regen is about 50% efficient, but I don't think the number has really been nailed down (and it likely depends on the conditions used).

The most efficient way to drive is to accelerate gently, anticipate future stops and coast (in neutral or at zero power on the accelerator, something hard to determine in the S model), then use regen as needed for additional slowing, then brake to a stop. Coasting, when safe to do so, is considerably more efficient than using regen braking*.

For more on efficient driving (hypermiling) you might want to take a look at Stoaty's Guide to Energy Efficient Driving of the Leaf.


* Under typical driving conditions. Technically, when moving near or at terminal velocity, regen would be more efficient than coasting. But this isn't a situation most drivers encounter.
Blue 2012 SV Dec 2011 to Feb 2016
CPO 2014 Tesla S60 Mar 2016
One car, no ICE, at last!
Tesla Referral Code

NasGoreList
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 7:15 pm
Delivery Date: 30 Apr 2014
Location: Falls Chruch, VA

Re: I Beat EPA's 73 Mile Range : Report your experience

Fri Sep 26, 2014 9:19 am

Vent wine tasting with our LEAF last weekend. Round trip was 86.4 miles with lots of elevation change and we used ac on the way there. I planned to stop and use the fast charger which was on the way back home (15 miles from our place). When we got to the fast charger location we had around 27% left in the battery so I just continued. As I pulled into our garage there was 15% of charge left in the battery so we could have easily gotten the 100 miles on that charge :mrgreen:

I was rather pleasantly surprised given that the trip was mostly highway (45-65mph), with AC use and lot of elevation change (home is at 360ish ft and vineyard was at almost 700ft of altitude). I did try to drive as conservatively as conditions allowed so I am sure that helped with the range we got.

Our LEAF is 2014 model s with 4000 miles on the clock manufactured in February of this year.

kikngas
Posts: 124
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:19 pm
Delivery Date: 15 Sep 2014
Leaf Number: 310377
Location: SE Minnesota

Re: I Beat EPA's 73 Mile Range : Report your experience

Fri Sep 26, 2014 11:18 pm

Note to self, when approaching terminal velocity, use regen. Better to capture some regen then to lose it all to wind resistance. Hmmm, other than a drop from a C-130, any ideas where I might test this out :lol: ? Perhaps driving in a circle counter to a hurricane's flow.

Yes. I found Stoates' thread on hypermiling. Thanks. It seems very much like I drove my 5-speed Del Sol to get 44MPG on my daily drive. I just would not have believed how much difference a bubble or two from each stop makes a difference in the LEAF. You learn a lot about how to hyper mile your ICE by the LEAF dashboard. They've done a descent job of presenting a lot of information in a digestible form.

I keep trying to Shakespeare it, " 'tis better to have sped and coasted then never to have... 'tis better to have coasted and not regened then to never have sped up... To have loved and lost is one thing, but to ride the brake and the throttle at the same time is quite another". Bottom line, regen is NOT as efficient as coasting. But if you must brake, it is best to go gradually and try to wait for a bubble to free up on the regen side of the meter as you slow before braking harder. It seems a natural transition from neutral to drive to brake mode. I often find myself all but stopped before the red light without pressing the brake peddle. Esp. if there is no one behind me driving as though there is no red light or stop sign before us.

Given that trying to coast with throttle alone means you must pull back as you slow and is rather an art, would it be easier if they created some sort of tone to help you perceive which side of neutral you are on, and by how far? That way you could find the neutral peddle position without staring away from the road. I was VERY impressed how seamless the transition from accelerate to coast to regen is. But it can also make it difficult to dial in the moving target when you want it. I prefer to use the throttle, but shifter seems best. Plus sets you back to hitting D before B mode.

I also wish the brake lights would at least flash or something when I hit more than two regen bubbles. Otherwise there is nothing to wake up the driver behind me.

User avatar
dgpcolorado
Posts: 2973
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 1:56 pm
Delivery Date: 15 Dec 2011
Location: The Western Slope, Colorado

Re: I Beat EPA's 73 Mile Range : Report your experience

Sat Sep 27, 2014 10:54 am

It appears that you have the basics down pat! Some thoughts on specific questions:

kikngas wrote:Note to self, when approaching terminal velocity, use regen. Better to capture some regen then to lose it all to wind resistance. Hmmm, other than a drop from a C-130, any ideas where I might test this out :lol: ? Perhaps driving in a circle counter to a hurricane's flow.
This experiment has been done by an old-time EVer. Without getting too technical, terminal velocity on a downgrade is when the deceleration due to drag equals the acceleration due to gravity and this is not the same as the terminal velocity of a LEAF in free fall. That's because the vector of force due to gravity is dependent on the slope of the hill. So, yes, you can hit terminal velocity on long hills of moderate grade. Quite easily. The optimum strategy is to regen your way to near the bottom and then allow the car to accelerate in neutral up to around terminal velocity just as you get to the bottom to maximize the rollout distance on the level section. While this is more of a thought problem than something most drivers encounter on a regular basis, my point was to suggest that there are some circumstances where regen is more efficient than coasting.

Yes. I found Stoates' thread on hypermiling. Thanks. It seems very much like I drove my 5-speed Del Sol to get 44MPG on my daily drive. I just would not have believed how much difference a bubble or two from each stop makes a difference in the LEAF. You learn a lot about how to hyper mile your ICE by the LEAF dashboard. They've done a descent job of presenting a lot of information in a digestible form...
Yes, for those willing to learn to hypermile, the LEAF does present a lot of helpful tools. I have also applied some of what I have learned to my ICE car, but it has the aerodynamics of a barn door and doesn't coast well at all.

As you have discovered, accelerating with a heavy foot (the "spirited driving" beloved by some) makes a huge difference in efficiency. I find that even a short time of high acceleration — twenty seconds or so — knocks my mileage efficiency, for the trip, down by a lot.
...Given that trying to coast with throttle alone means you must pull back as you slow and is rather an art, would it be easier if they created some sort of tone to help you perceive which side of neutral you are on, and by how far? That way you could find the neutral peddle position without staring away from the road. I was VERY impressed how seamless the transition from accelerate to coast to regen is. But it can also make it difficult to dial in the moving target when you want it. I prefer to use the throttle, but shifter seems best. Plus sets you back to hitting D before B mode.
The SV and SL models have an energy meter on the nav console that gives a very good reading of energy being used/generated. You might want to get some sort of aftermarket meter to give that information on the S model. [It would be helpful if you mentioned that you have a 2015 S model in your signature; the year and model can make a big difference when answering questions.] I use my Leaf DD — no longer available except for an occasional private sale here at MNL — for that purpose. There are other options, such as LEAF Spy.
I also wish the brake lights would at least flash or something when I hit more than two regen bubbles. Otherwise there is nothing to wake up the driver behind me.
This issue has been much discussed in other threads and your view is held by many others here. I would like the brake lights to be acceleration dependent — regen down hills at constant velocity wouldn't trigger them but regen causing actual slowing, over a certain threshold, would.

Happy LEAFing!
Blue 2012 SV Dec 2011 to Feb 2016
CPO 2014 Tesla S60 Mar 2016
One car, no ICE, at last!
Tesla Referral Code

GRA
Posts: 7579
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: I Beat EPA's 73 Mile Range : Report your experience

Sat Sep 27, 2014 12:33 pm

dgpcolorado wrote:
I also wish the brake lights would at least flash or something when I hit more than two regen bubbles. Otherwise there is nothing to wake up the driver behind me.
This issue has been much discussed in other threads and your view is held by many others here. I would like the brake lights to be acceleration dependent — regen down hills at constant velocity wouldn't trigger them but regen causing actual slowing, over a certain threshold, would.

Happy LEAFing!

I believe but am not sure that the U.S. adheres to this (it definitely applies in the EU), but the U.N (i.e. international) reg. states that for regen braking, at decelerations

<= 0.7 m/s² The signal [i.e. brake light] shall not be generated

> 0.7 m/s² <= 1.3 m/s² The signal may be generated

> 1.3 m/s² The signal shall be generated

In all cases the signal shall be de-activated at the latest when the deceleration has fallen below 0.7 m/s².
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.

User avatar
RegGuheert
Posts: 5622
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 4:12 am
Delivery Date: 16 Mar 2012
Leaf Number: 5926
Location: Northern VA

Re: I Beat EPA's 73 Mile Range : Report your experience

Sat Sep 27, 2014 12:54 pm

GRA wrote:I believe but am not sure that the U.S. adheres to this (it definitely applies in the EU), but the U.N (i.e. international) reg. states that for regen braking, at decelerations

<= 0.7 m/s² The signal [i.e. brake light] shall not be generated

> 0.7 m/s² <= 1.3 m/s² The signal may be generated

> 1.3 m/s² The signal shall be generated

In all cases the signal shall be de-activated at the latest when the deceleration has fallen below 0.7 m/s².
IMO, basing whether or not to light the brake lights on rates of acceleration is a bad idea. It's the kind of regulation only a government could come up with. That's not how normal brake lights work and it can lead to rear-end collisions even in the case where the vehicles is accelerating. On a steep grade, it is important for the cars behind to see that a force of deceleration is being applied, regardless of whether or not the car is actually decelerating. That way, the following vehicles is alerted that they may need to apply the brakes in order to avoid a collision.

If, OTOH, the regulations are written such that the brake lights come on when regen applies a force that would result in those rates of deceleration in the absence of all other forces, then that makes some sense.
RegGuheert
2011 Leaf SL Demo vehicle
10K miles: Apr 14, 2013, 20K miles (55.7Ah): Aug 7, 2014, 30K miles (52.0Ah): Dec 30, 2015, 40K miles (49.8Ah): Feb 8, 2017, 50K miles (47.2Ah): Dec 7, 2017.
Enphase Inverter Measured MTBF: M190, M215, M250, S280

kikngas
Posts: 124
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2014 12:19 pm
Delivery Date: 15 Sep 2014
Leaf Number: 310377
Location: SE Minnesota

Re: I Beat EPA's 73 Mile Range : Report your experience

Sat Sep 27, 2014 1:03 pm

dgpcolorado wrote:The SV and SL models have an energy meter on the nav console that gives a very good reading of energy being used/generated.


The 2015 S has the real-time indication of miles per kWh, which I believe is the "energy meter" provided when there is no nav installed. But it pegs at 8 with any coasting or regen, thus making it difficult to confirm until you also check the bubbles, and you have to watch it all of the time to try and use throttle to achieve a good neutral. And the gauge jumping about seems to show how badly I am doing with the throttle :cry:

So, I've been trying to get used to the idea that throwing it in reverse is doing far less physical damage to anything then pressing the clutch was with my ICE stick. Most of my hills are short enough that I can just pull a bit of regen off at the bottom and keep to a reasonable speed. In general, I think I'm better off (least so far as optimizing kWh/mi) to pick up some speed for the next stretch up hill.

You would think the cruise would have a much wider speed range when in eco, but this does not seem to be the case. It seems to hold a very tight range to the point of being rather inefficient from my brief experience with it.

GRA
Posts: 7579
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: I Beat EPA's 73 Mile Range : Report your experience

Sat Sep 27, 2014 2:14 pm

RegGuheert wrote:
GRA wrote:I believe but am not sure that the U.S. adheres to this (it definitely applies in the EU), but the U.N (i.e. international) reg. states that for regen braking, at decelerations

<= 0.7 m/s² The signal [i.e. brake light] shall not be generated

> 0.7 m/s² <= 1.3 m/s² The signal may be generated

> 1.3 m/s² The signal shall be generated

In all cases the signal shall be de-activated at the latest when the deceleration has fallen below 0.7 m/s².
IMO, basing whether or not to light the brake lights on rates of acceleration is a bad idea. It's the kind of regulation only a government could come up with. That's not how normal brake lights work and it can lead to rear-end collisions even in the case where the vehicles is accelerating. On a steep grade, it is important for the cars behind to see that a force of deceleration is being applied, regardless of whether or not the car is actually decelerating. That way, the following vehicles is alerted that they may need to apply the brakes in order to avoid a collision.

If, OTOH, the regulations are written such that the brake lights come on when regen applies a force that would result in those rates of deceleration in the absence of all other forces, then that makes some sense.

Having owned manual transmission cars exclusively for all my driving life, I think the reg is written just as it should be, and despite regularly using compression braking to slow me down or retard my acceleration going down steep hills, I've never been rear-ended. What do you think all the semis are doing on descents, riding their brakes the whole way down? If I'm slowing down sufficiently fast that the person behind me doesn't have time to react unless they see a visual signal, I'm using the brakes as well as the engine. The rest of the time, brake lights are unneeded, if the following driver is maintaining reasonable alertness. If I think they may not be,or are a bit close, I'll just tap the brake pedal lightly. If they aren't alert my car could be lit up like a XMAS tree crossed with the UFO from Close Encounters of the Third Kind and they'd still hit me.
Last edited by GRA on Sun Sep 28, 2014 2:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
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.

User avatar
JPWhite
Gold Member
Posts: 1753
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 3:41 pm
Delivery Date: 30 Jul 2011
Leaf Number: 5734
Location: Hendersonville TN
Contact: Website WLM Yahoo Messenger AOL

Re: I Beat EPA's 73 Mile Range : Report your experience

Sat Sep 27, 2014 2:27 pm

With all the current and proposed driving assistance tools, brake light gymnastics maybe unnecessary with a following vehicle automatically slowing down to avoud a collision even though the dolt in the car behind is attempting to accelerate into your front seat.
--
JP White
http://jpwhitenissanleaf.com
Blue SL-e, Res 4/22/10, Ord 3/29/11, Del 7/30/11
110,000 Miles.
Lost 5 Capacity bars
7/18/13 (29,206), 8/25/14 (51,728), 7/12/15 (71.108), 5/12/16 (88,362), 10/17/16 (96,532)
New Battery 12/3/16 (98,956)

User avatar
dgpcolorado
Posts: 2973
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 1:56 pm
Delivery Date: 15 Dec 2011
Location: The Western Slope, Colorado

Re: I Beat EPA's 73 Mile Range : Report your experience

Sat Sep 27, 2014 3:22 pm

GRA wrote:Having owned manual transmission cars exclusively for all my driving life, I think the reg is written just as it should be, and despite regularly using compression braking to slow me down or retard my acceleration down on steep hills, I've never been rear-ended. What do you think all the semis are doing on descents, riding their brakes the whole way down? If I'm slowing down sufficiently fast that the person behind me doesn't have time to react unless they see a visual signal, I'm using the brakes as well as the engine. The rest of the time, brake lights are unneeded, if the following driver is maintaining reasonable alertness. If I think they may not be,or are a bit close, I'll just tap the brake pedal lightly. If they aren't alert my car could be lit up like a XMAS tree crossed with the UFO from Close Encounters of the Third Kind and they'd still hit me.
I agree. I have driven more than 400,000 miles in manual transmission cars and routinely descend steep hills in gear with no brakes (the "rule of thumb" is that one descends in the same gear used to ascend the same grade). Brake lights when the car is traveling at constant velocity are unnecessary; it is when the car is decelerating that drivers behind need a warning.
Blue 2012 SV Dec 2011 to Feb 2016
CPO 2014 Tesla S60 Mar 2016
One car, no ICE, at last!
Tesla Referral Code

Return to “Range / Efficiency / Carwings”