24% loss in 5 years is "normal" says NISSAN

[theaveng]

http://www.torquenews.com/1075/nissan-responds-leaf-owners-massive-test-battery-aging-case" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Didn't they say 20% loss over ten years? (Yes, see below.) Now suddenly they changed it to five years. Hmmm. "Nissan collected data from 7 Nissan Leafs in Arizona and has found that they are on a path which will result in 76% capacity after five years, rather than the 80% capacity Nissan had expected. Nissan's published claims of expected range loss over time were based on an average driving distance of 12,500 miles/year in climates similar to Los Angeles."

Friday I bought a third car.
No it wasn't a Leaf with its battery issues.
It was a car that has proven its longevity: Insight. I "scored" 61mpg even though I was driving across plains and over mountains and through deserts at 75 miles an hour. The only other car I've ever seen score so high was the Volkswagen Lupo (a diesel engine). The Prius and Chevy volt and other hybrids don't come anywhere near that high at those speeds.

*
*Mark Perry, Nissan’s director of product planning, said, “If fast charging is the primary way that a Leaf owner recharges, then the gradual capacity loss is about 10 percent more than 220-volt charging. In other words, it will bring the capacity…closer to 70 percent after 10 years.” January of 2010: "We don't need thermal management in the U.S. ... We've gone on record saying that the pack has a 70 to 80 percent capacity after 10 years." From Hybridcars.com: "After 10 years, 70 to 80 percent of the pack’s capacity will be left. The exact amount will depend on how much (440-volt) fast charging is done—as well as environmental factors, such as extreme hot weather, which is tough on the battery."

So there is is.
And now suddenly changed to 5 years.
Corporate liars.

 

[ericsf]

In 5 years, my LEAF will have saved me 10K in gasoline cost alone. I don't mind if I have to put that money into buying a new battery. What's the point about arguing about 5% difference. We all know the heat is putting a toll on everything. Electronics, battery, even ICE probably age faster there. Where is the problem?

 

[downeykp]

In 5 years, my LEAF will have saved me 10K in gasoline cost alone. I don't mind if I have to put that money into buying a new battery. What's the point about arguing about 5% difference. We all know the heat is putting a toll on everything. Electronics, battery, even ICE probably age faster there. Where is the problem?

The problem is, what if you get transferred to say Arizona, and your 80% charged Leaf will not make your daily commute because you have lost capacity in your battery after only a year of use. Wouldn't that be a problem? Nissan went out of their way to promote 100 mi. range then 80 or 90 mi. range so many took the bait and dove into uncharted waters in the belief that Nissan was a "stand up" company. I guess you would not see that as a problem.

 

[ericsf]

In 5 years, my LEAF will have saved me 10K in gasoline cost alone. I don't mind if I have to put that money into buying a new battery. What's the point about arguing about 5% difference. We all know the heat is putting a toll on everything. Electronics, battery, even ICE probably age faster there. Where is the problem?

The problem is, what if you get transferred to say Arizona, and your 80% charged Leaf will not make your daily commute because you have lost capacity in your battery after only a year of use. Wouldn't that be a problem? Nissan went out of their way to promote 100 mi. range then 80 or 90 mi. range so many took the bait and dove into uncharted waters in the belief that Nissan was a "stand up" company. I guess you would not see that as a problem.

You're talking about 20% loss per year. That's a different story. There is a handfull of cars which may be on this slope. IF all the LEAF owners had this problem, I would certainly be concerned. But it's not the case. So what is your point?

BTW, I am still amazed that Nissan had the balls to display the battery degradation on the dashboard.

 

[theaveng]

In 5 years, my LEAF will have saved me 10K in gasoline cost alone.

Damn boy, you must have some frakking cheap electricity then! And drive a whole hell of a lot (20K/year):

100,000 miles == 3333 gallons == $12,500 worth of gasoline in my older car that averages 30mpg. That same 100,000 miles would cost [$4500] electricity (15c per kwh). I seriously doubt you drive that much, or that your battery will last that long. Even if you managed to save that much money in five years, you'd be throwing it away on a new replacement pack.

 

[ericsf]

In 5 years, my LEAF will have saved me 10K in gasoline cost alone.

Damn boy, you must have some frakking cheap electricity then! And drive a whole hell of a lot (20K/year):

$12,500 worth of gasoline == 3333 gallons == 100,000 miles in my older car that averages 30mpg. That same 100,000 miles would cost $3300 electricity. I seriously doubt you drive that much, or that your battery will last that long. So even if you managed to save that much money, you'd be throwing it away on a new replacement pack.

Yep you got it. My electricity is 15 cent per kWh when I charge at home and even cheaper when use the public infrastructure (12cents near my work or free in San Francisco). And I do drive a lot. I've put 28K on it in 1.5 year. And I forgot: the car my LEAF replaces does 28mpg.

But I don't understand why you say replacing the pack is wasting money. Everything wears down and eventually needs to be replaced. In my case it will most likely pay for itself.

 

[azdre]

The problem is that capacity and range do not appear to be lost at the same rate. Nissan measured our capacity loss at 14%, but our real life driving range has reduced by 25%. Could the next 10% capacity loss result in an additional 15% range loss? That would mean we are paying a 40% range penalty for a 26% capacity loss.

Also, this was supposed to happen gradually, whereas we've seen all 25% of this loss within the last 6 out of 18 months. Couple that with the fact that the story has changed with each and every interaction with Nissan. On April 27th I was told one bar is normal and I'd never see another bar loss... Ever. Then at 2 bars lost I was told, oh that's a problem, you better bring it in, promptly followed by 'it's normal'. It goes on and on.

The target continues to move and the language remains unclear. I fully planned to be at 80% capacity loss earlier than 5 years, because we charged to 100%. I guessed 4 years was a reasonable timeframe. By the time those 4 years were up, we should be able to upgrade the pack and be good to go or charging infrastructure was available to make up the difference to charge on the go. The ability to save money with this car is directly proportional to the number of miles it can go. Our planning did not account for a sudden range cliff, because it was not part of the information given to us about the car.

Please tell me that you now see the problem? I wouldn't be happy with a 14% capacity loss, but it could be manageable if it meant a 14% loss of range. In just the last 2 months, I've lost 10 miles of range. That's a big deal. And all that others can do is watch me post things like this and wait for it to happen to them. It was weeks after the bar loss that I posted here to see if anyone else had seen this, it was then weeks later that I insisted a dealer check it out. I would have agreed with you that it's not that big of a deal if there wasn't many many owners following with the same experience.

 

[ericsf]

The problem is that capacity and range do not appear to be lost at the same rate. Nissan measured our capacity loss at 14%, but our real life driving range has reduced by 25%. Could the next 10% capacity loss result in an additional 15% range loss? That would mean we are paying a 40% range penalty for a 26% capacity loss.

Also, this was supposed to happen gradually, whereas we've seen all 25% of this loss within the last 6 out of 18 months. Couple that with the fact that the story has changed with each and every interaction with Nissan. On April 27th I was told one bar is normal and I'd never see another bar loss... Ever. Then at 2 bars lost I was told, oh that's a problem, you better bring it in, promptly followed by 'it's normal'. It goes on and on.

The target continues to move and the language remains unclear. I fully planned to be at 80% capacity loss earlier than 5 years, because we charged to 100%. I guessed 4 years was a reasonable timeframe. By the time those 4 years were up, we should be able to upgrade the pack and be good to go or charging infrastructure was available to make up the difference to charge on the go. The ability to save money with this car is directly proportional to the number of miles it can go. Our planning did not account for a sudden range cliff, because it was not part of the information given to us about the car.

Please tell me that you now see the problem? I wouldn't be happy with a 14% capacity loss, but it could be manageable if it meant a 14% loss of range. In just the last 2 months, I've lost 10 miles of range. That's a big deal. And all that others can do is watch me post things like this and wait for it to happen to them. It was weeks after the bar loss that I posted here to see if anyone else had seen this, it was then weeks later that I insisted a dealer check it out. I would have agreed with you that it's not that big of a deal if there wasn't many many owners following with the same experience.

My response was to 24% in 5 years instead of the "promised" 20% Nissan originally communicated. I never wrote that there no problem in Arizona and other hot places. I do feel bad for you and the other people who are experiencing capacity loss. But I agree with Nissan on the fact that you are a small group and that the majority does not have the same problem. I understand that you are trying to get Nissan's attention by making it sound sensational and scarry but I do feel sad that this noise is basically turning off a lot of potential EV buyers. When car manufacturers will decide that there is no market for EV and stop selling them, there will be no battery problems to argue about anymore.

 

[adric22]

Didn't they say 20% loss over ten years? Now suddenly they changed it to five years. Hmmm. "Nissan collected data from 7 Nissan Leafs in Arizona and has found that they are on a path which will result in 76% capacity after five years,

Gee... Why don't we start a new thread every day on capacity loss. I'm just about to the point I don't want to come to this forum any more because that is all anyone on here wants to talk about.

Nissan went out of their way to promote 100 mi. range then 80 or 90 mi. range so many took the bait and dove into uncharted waters in the belief that Nissan was a "stand up" company. I guess you would not see that as a problem.

I don't know about you, but I was required to sign a document when purchasing my Leaf that clearly stated the expected range under various conditions. The numbers were very conservative too. I don't remember exactly but many of the conditions showed ranges in the 50 to 60 miles ballpark.

 

[camasleaf]

Didn't they say 20% loss over ten years?

No, it was 20 in 5 years and 30 in 10 years. And that is overall average. Some unlucky owners will see more some lucky ones less. As long as the average of all Leafs sold in the world still have 20% capacity in 5 years Nissan can claim it delivered its promise.

The forecast for 76% capacity loss in 5 years is only for the cars in Arizona. That does make you wonder were the capacity for those cars will be in 10 years. Again they can be at 30%, but if the sold Leafs average 70%, then Nissan will have kept its promise. Numbers do not have feelings.

That being said, I feel sorry for the hot climate Leaf owners. And I do feel that Nissan should do something about it, but not because what they promised. It is because if they claim to be serious about EV. A while back I said that if the Leaf/EVs are killed again by the oil companies I will only buy Nissan ICEs as a thanks for what they started with the Leaf. Well, if Nissan does not do anything about the Arizona issue then I will never buy a Nissan ICE again and I will think twice about buying a Nissan EV again.

I was today at Costco and a $30000 Toyota with 28mpg was estimated to cost $2000 a year in gas. For 10 years that I usually keep the cars that will be $50000. If you add maintenance and higher gas prices you are talking $60000. Tesla model S does not sound expensive anymore.

I pay 0.08 $/kwh, so for me it made perfect sense to buy a Leaf.

I wish all Leaf owners in hot climate a happy ending to their Leaf ownership experience.

 

[ericsf]

Thanks adric22!

 

[gbarry42]

BTW, I am still amazed that Nissan had the balls to display the battery degradation on the dashboard.

I am amazed no one else has made this observation before. I've been looking for a good place to post this sentiment. Especially with a company that did its best to hide every other available metric, this one was a really big surprise. I had wondered if it would come back to haunt them.

And while we're here, note that 76% "average" loss means that some fraction of people will retain higher capacity that this while another fraction will see worse.

 

[azdre]

Ok... You're right. I've been post-happy lately. The shift of 20 to 24 percent expectation is not significant in my mind, especially considering a 20% loss likely results in 30-35% of range loss making the car unusable at 20% capacity loss, another 4% is no biggie.

 

[theaveng]

My electricity is 15 cent per kWh

I revised my calculation using your 15 cent/kwh figure and now I see a savings of just $8000 over 100,000 miles. Nowhere near your claimed 10k saved. Now subtract the cost of that new battery pack since its range will be around 70% and not long enough to get to work..... and you have no net savings at all. You might even have a loss. (And no I've never had to spend 10,000 to replace something in my car..... the EV maintenance is much much higher.)

 

[RegGuheert]

Here's a question: Is it possible for someone living in Phoenix to drive a 2011 or 2012 Nissan LEAF 100,000 miles without replacing the battery pack? I believe the answer is "No".

 

[theaveng]

On April 27th I was told one bar is normal and I'd never see another bar loss... Ever. Then at 2 bars lost I was told, oh that's a problem, you better bring it in, promptly followed by 'it's normal'. It goes on and on. The target continues to move and the language remains unclear......

They are Japanese. Their culture is built around "saving face" and avoiding dishonor, rather than admit a mistake.
Both Honda and Toyota had to lose a class-action lawsuit before they were willing to replace their cars' batteries. Honda extended the warranty from 80,000 to 160,000 miles. Toyota also extended the battery warranty (though I don't know how much) in order to avoid losing any more lawsuits. Perhaps Nissan will have to face the same penalty to "wake up" from their attempt to save face & honor.

 

[cwerdna]

On April 27th I was told one bar is normal and I'd never see another bar loss... Ever. Then at 2 bars lost I was told, oh that's a problem, you better bring it in, promptly followed by 'it's normal'. It goes on and on. The target continues to move and the language remains unclear......

They are Japanese. Their culture is built around "saving face" and avoiding dishonor, rather than admit a mistake.
Toyota also extended the battery warranty (though I don't know how much) in order to avoid losing any more lawsuits.

Source? What are you referring to?

 

[adric22]

Both Honda and Toyota had to lose a class-action lawsuit before they were willing to replace their cars' batteries. Honda extended the warranty from 80,000 to 160,000 miles. Toyota also extended the battery warranty (though I don't know how much) in order to avoid losing any more lawsuits. Perhaps Nissan will have to face the same penalty to "wake up" from their attempt to save face & honor.

I do not believe Toyota has had any trouble with their batteries failing during warranty. Honda is the only one.

 

[TomT]

I would not be surprised to see that display disappear in the 2013...

BTW, I am still amazed that Nissan had the balls to display the battery degradation on the dashboard.

 

[downeykp]

The problem is that capacity and range do not appear to be lost at the same rate. Nissan measured our capacity loss at 14%, but our real life driving range has reduced by 25%. Could the next 10% capacity loss result in an additional 15% range loss? That would mean we are paying a 40% range penalty for a 26% capacity loss.

Also, this was supposed to happen gradually, whereas we've seen all 25% of this loss within the last 6 out of 18 months. Couple that with the fact that the story has changed with each and every interaction with Nissan. On April 27th I was told one bar is normal and I'd never see another bar loss... Ever. Then at 2 bars lost I was told, oh that's a problem, you better bring it in, promptly followed by 'it's normal'. It goes on and on.

The target continues to move and the language remains unclear. I fully planned to be at 80% capacity loss earlier than 5 years, because we charged to 100%. I guessed 4 years was a reasonable timeframe. By the time those 4 years were up, we should be able to upgrade the pack and be good to go or charging infrastructure was available to make up the difference to charge on the go. The ability to save money with this car is directly proportional to the number of miles it can go. Our planning did not account for a sudden range cliff, because it was not part of the information given to us about the car.

Please tell me that you now see the problem? I wouldn't be happy with a 14% capacity loss, but it could be manageable if it meant a 14% loss of range. In just the last 2 months, I've lost 10 miles of range. That's a big deal. And all that others can do is watch me post things like this and wait for it to happen to them. It was weeks after the bar loss that I posted here to see if anyone else had seen this, it was then weeks later that I insisted a dealer check it out. I would have agreed with you that it's not that big of a deal if there wasn't many many owners following with the same experience.

My response was to 24% in 5 years instead of the "promised" 20% Nissan originally communicated. I never wrote that there no problem in Arizona and other hot places. I do feel bad for you and the other people who are experiencing capacity loss. But I agree with Nissan on the fact that you are a small group and that the majority does not have the same problem. I understand that you are trying to get Nissan's attention by making it sound sensational and scarry but I do feel sad that this noise is basically turning off a lot of potential EV buyers. When car manufacturers will decide that there is no market for EV and stop selling them, there will be no battery problems to argue about anymore.

You are really missing the point. All Leafs have the same problem. The battery is faulty. Just add heat and your Leaf will also melt. It is a design flaw. I hope you never get sent to a hot climate with your Leaf. you will be singing another tune.