Capacity Loss on 2011-2012 LEAFs

[Boomer23]

I also noticed kolmsted's comment about no longer being able to make the 83 miles to the dealer. Pretty significant impact, since he'll need a tow both ways, just to get his car looked at and his issues logged.

 

[SanDust]

I believe the Volt pack is part of the emission system like the Prius and thus must be warrantied as such. The capacity buffer allows them to keep it in compliance and under warranty. This is not required on a LEAF.

Doesn't seem to be the case. Just looked at the warranty:

Propulsion Battery Warranty Policy

Like all batteries, the amount ofcenergy that the high voltage “propulsion” battery can store will decrease with time and miles driven. Depending on use, the battery may degrade as little as 10% to as much as 30% of capacity over the warranty period. A dealer service technician will determine if the battery energy capacity (kWh storage) is within the proper limit, given the age and mileage of the vehicle. Typical tests can take up to 24 hours.

Of course having a buffer that you can use may make the capacity loss hidden from the user, but the warranty doesn't address that.

 

[vrwl]

OK, one more for the list in the Phoenix area. My friend Tim, who is not on this forum, lost a capacity tick yesterday. He got his car in August of 2011.

Added to the Wiki

 

[vrwl]

LEAF #257 lost a bar over the weekend. 14,278 miles, white, nineteen months of ownership, zero QC, always charged to 80% using an end timer. No signs of the dreaded '9-bar to 80%' symptoms. I knew it was coming; we had 110 degrees every day last week. One day the battery temp was 7 bars most of the way to work, 6 bars when I got there, and then 7 bars when I drove home. Car sits out in the sun every weekday. I use about 10 kWh per day, so the car charges between 1am and 4am, when things are coolest. Oh, and it's still running original firmware. Ridgecrest, CA. Noticeable decrease in range. Can't make the 83 mile trip to dealer any more.

Our first report of a CA capacity bar loss added to the Wiki

 

[mwalsh]

Major bummer. I do think you're the first in California - don't recall who else was aiming for that distinction. Certainly nothing more you could do in your situation to prolong battery life. Ridgecrest is just darn hot.

That was me. But I'm just as glad to give up the (dubious) honor to someone else. Sorry for your loss, kolmsted.

 

[LEAFer]

Drees, the update didn't offer any advantages that I could use, and I hated the idea of 'hidden bars'. I was comfortable with the behavior of the DTE meter and didn't want it to change.

I'm wondering if this is why you never had "nine bars after charging to 80%" like others have seen.

Probably.

We saw some 9/12 bars (at 80% charging) as early as February 2012 (about 16k miles, 13 months old), but only once or twice. Then again in April (once or twice). Since mid-May happening more often, but not consistently (10/12 is still the norm). See signature below for a GID check end of June (around 8% "loss", but no base-line to compare to when new). The 9/12 is now happening maybe 1/3 to 1/2 of the 80% charges. Was hot (100-105F, 60F at night) here (Sacramento) for a week straight last week; now a little "cooler" again.

Sorry to hear of your loss, kolmstead.

 

[LEAFfan]

See signature below for a GID check end of June (around 8% "loss", but no base-line to compare to when new).

Actually, your capacity loss is around 2-3%, not 8%. I know you are basing it on 100%, but if you choose to do that, then when your gauge reads '85%' after a 100% charge with L2, you would lose a bar as you would believe it to be a 15% loss. But if that were true, then all of these Phoenix area cars (that have been meter tested) would have lost a bar when the meter read 85%, but not one car did. They only lost a bar when the meter read around 80%, not 85%. I can't explain why this is so, but using 94-95% gives a much more accurate reading for capacity loss than using 100%.

 

[surfingslovak]

See signature below for a GID check end of June (around 8% "loss", but no base-line to compare to when new). The 9/12 is now happening maybe 1/3 to 1/2 of the 80% charges. Was hot (100-105F, 60F at night) here (Sacramento) for a week straight last week; now a little "cooler" again.

That's interesting! Everyone we gathered data from in the SF Bay Area was 270 or above. Would you have any data points from other vehicles in Sacramento?

 

[Stoaty]

Actually, your capacity loss is around 2-3%, not 8%. I know you are basing it on 100%, but if you choose to do that, then when your gauge reads '85%' after a 100% charge with L2, you would lose a bar as you would believe it to be a 15% loss. But if that were true, then all of these Phoenix area cars (that have been meter tested) would have lost a bar when the meter read 85%, but not one car did. They only lost a bar when the meter read around 80%, not 85%. I can't explain why this is so, but using 94-95% gives a much more accurate reading for capacity loss than using 100%.

I would interpret the data somewhat differently: you have an 8% loss, but if you subtract 5% from your actual loss you will get a better indication of when one of the battery capacity bars will be lost. It may be that Nissan adds a "slop" factor to the battery capacity bars so that a car has to lose somewhat more than 15% capacity in order for the bar to be lost. Let's face it: Gids is Gids, and whatever percent you lose, you have lost that much battery capacity.

 

[LEAFfan]

Actually, your capacity loss is around 2-3%, not 8%. I know you are basing it on 100%, but if you choose to do that, then when your gauge reads '85%' after a 100% charge with L2, you would lose a bar as you would believe it to be a 15% loss. But if that were true, then all of these Phoenix area cars (that have been meter tested) would have lost a bar when the meter read 85%, but not one car did. They only lost a bar when the meter read around 80%, not 85%. I can't explain why this is so, but using 94-95% gives a much more accurate reading for capacity loss than using 100%.

I would interpret the data somewhat differently: you have an 8% loss, but if you subtract 5% from your actual loss you will get a better indication of when one of the battery capacity bars will be lost. It may be that Nissan adds a "slop" factor to the battery capacity bars so that a car has to lose somewhat more than 15% capacity in order for the bar to be lost. Let's face it: Gids is Gids, and whatever percent you lose, you have lost that much battery capacity.

True, gids are gids, but that can't be translated to actual lost battery capacity using the LEAF's bars, just lost gids. Your explanation may explain why 94-95% works, but all I'm concerned about is an accurate battery capacity loss reading and it doesn't matter to me how that is calculated. Nissan has said that when a bar is lost, it means a 15% loss of capacity. So to arrive at that, I found using 94-95% works and is accurate to within 1-2%. It also works for the next bar loss (6.25%). The meter will read 73-74% after an L2 100% charge when they have just lost the second bar and 75-76% when they are about to lose the second bar. Even most new cars (2012) here will only read 94-95% after an L2 100% charge. So I guess they've lost 4-5% already before they leave the lot. It probably depends on how long they've been sitting in the sun on the lot and if they are kept at 100% charge.

 

[surfingslovak]

Actually, your capacity loss is around 2-3%, not 8%. I know you are basing it on 100%, but if you choose to do that, then when your gauge reads '85%' after a 100% charge with L2, you would lose a bar as you would believe it to be a 15% loss. But if that were true, then all of these Phoenix area cars (that have been meter tested) would have lost a bar when the meter read 85%, but not one car did. They only lost a bar when the meter read around 80%, not 85%. I can't explain why this is so, but using 94-95% gives a much more accurate reading for capacity loss than using 100%.

I would interpret the data somewhat differently: you have an 8% loss, but if you subtract 5% from your actual loss you will get a better indication of when one of the battery capacity bars will be lost. It may be that Nissan adds a "slop" factor to the battery capacity bars so that a car has to lose somewhat more than 15% capacity in order for the bar to be lost. Let's face it: Gids is Gids, and whatever percent you lose, you have lost that much battery capacity.

True, gids are gids, but that can't be translated to actual lost battery capacity using the LEAF's bars, just lost gids. Your explanation may explain why 94-95% works, but all I'm concerned about is an accurate battery capacity loss reading and it doesn't matter to me how that is calculated. Nissan has said that when a bar is lost, it means a 15% loss of capacity. So to arrive at that, I found using 94-95% works and is accurate to within 1-2%. It also works for the next bar loss (6.25%). The meter will read 73-74% after an L2 100% charge when they have just lost the second bar and 75-76% when they are about to lose the second bar. Even most new cars (2012) here will only read 94-95% after an L2 100% charge. So I guess they've lost 4-5% already before they leave the lot. It probably depends on how long they've been sitting in the sun on the lot and if they are kept at 100% charge.

Interesting points. I believe this goes back to one thing: we don't know what the relationship between Gids (or level in Nissan's vernacular) and permanent capacity loss is. Presumably, the capacity bars are displaying the latter, however it's calculated. If I'm looking at just one charge or trip, Gids are eminently useful, but we have yet to understand the slight seasonal variation we seem to be experiencing and the relationship to other battery characteristics (if there is one).

 

[Stoaty]

Even most new cars (2012) here will only read 94-95% after an L2 100% charge. So I guess they've lost 4-5% already before they leave the lot. It probably depends on how long they've been sitting in the sun on the lot and if they are kept at 100% charge.

That may be true in Arizona, but I don't think I have seen that reported in California. Most people were reporting Gids in the high 270's to 281 when the Gid meter first came out. I was a bit disappointed because my initial 100% charge Gid reading (after 4 months of ownership) was only 272 (=96.8%). One has to wonder if dealers are leaving cars fully charged before the sale, which would be especially bad for those in hot climates like Phoenix.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

That may be true in Arizona, but I don't think I have seen that reported in California. Most people were reporting Gids in the high 270's to 281 when the Gid meter first came out. I was a bit disappointed because my initial 100% charge Gid reading (after 4 months of ownership) was only 272 (=96.8%). One has to wonder if dealers are leaving cars fully charged before the sale, which would be especially bad for those in hot climates like Phoenix.

i am guessing you measured it multiple times right? because i have also gotten 272 recently as in last week sometime but also had a 281 on Saturday. so one reading cant be taken too seriously unless its consistently repeatable

 

[LEAFer]

To answer someone's question above: No, I don't know anyone else who might have a GID meter in the Sacramento Area. I only had one to borrow for two days when I had Tony's LEAF here at home.

I measured 256 GIDs on the first morning and 259 (which is what I am reporting in signature) on the second morning (6/28/12), each shortly (1-2 hours) after a 100% charge complete message. I do not have a baseline to report on our LEAF, I can simply make the (bad) assumption that it should have had a 281 reading when new. It was delivered in January 2011 (winter) and was on the dealer's lot no more than 30 hours, and likely not charged to 100% for very long. We have never QC'd, but frequently charge to 100% (half the number of charges?), and it has sat at 100% a couple dozen times for more than 8-12 hours :-( and in two of those cases for 24-30 hours. Few if any of those occurences were at above 75F ambient. Turtled once, almost turtled another time, LBW several dozens of times (we live 9 miles from the freeway, so 18 miles round-trip is "wasted"), and VLBW a couple of dozen times. Frequently driven 60-70 miles/day. Driven and charged practically every day.

Tony's LEAF showed 231 GIDs after a 10/12 bar charge and 279 GIDs after 12/12 on that same second morning (3,462 miles on the Odo, 1-2 months old) under obviously the same weather conditions (both LEAFs parked outside overnight). Both of those measurements were 1/2 to 1 hour after the respective notification (which I believe is delayed a little).

So ... who in the Sacramento Area does have a GID meter and can add some results ?

 

[Volusiano]

LEAF #257 lost a bar over the weekend. 14,278 miles, white, nineteen months of ownership, zero QC, always charged to 80% using an end timer. No signs of the dreaded '9-bar to 80%' symptoms. I knew it was coming; we had 110 degrees every day last week. One day the battery temp was 7 bars most of the way to work, 6 bars when I got there, and then 7 bars when I drove home. Car sits out in the sun every weekday. I use about 10 kWh per day, so the car charges between 1am and 4am, when things are coolest. Oh, and it's still running original firmware. Ridgecrest, CA. Noticeable decrease in range. Can't make the 83 mile trip to dealer any more.

Have other Tucson LEAF owners lost capacity bars like the Phoenix owners are reporting? I lost one last month shortly after my one-year service. Ron (from Tuscon Area Leafers thread in this same forum)

1. Azdre & Opossum - April 26, 2012. 16.6K miles/13 months ownership. Phoenix (2nd bar loss reported 6/14/2012 @~19K miles)
2. bturner - May 12, 2012. 13.6K/12 months. Phoenix (2nd bar loss reported 7/7/2012)
3. turbo2ltr - May 18, 2012. 13K/15 months. Phoenix (2nd bar loss reported 6/29/2012)
4. TickTock - May 20, 2012. 14K/12 months Phoenix (2nd bar loss reported 7/10/2012)
5. Volusiano - May 20, 2012. 16.5K/12 months. Phoenix
6. Mark13 - May 22, 2012. 15.7K/12 months. Phoenix (2nd bar loss reported 7/1/2012)
7. Leafkabob - May 26, 2012. 9.5K/12 months. Phoenix
8. Cyellen - June 7, 2012. 10.2K/ 14 months. Phoenix
9. RickS - June 10, 2012. 11.3K/13 months. Phoenix
10. Pipcecil - June 17, 2012. 20.2K/12 months. Dallas, Texas
11. Phxsmiley - June 17, 2012. 13.7K/10 months. Phoenix
12. AZknauer - June 17, 2012. 9.2K/13.5 months. Phoenix
13. Myleaf - June 19, 2012. 13.3K/14 months. Phoenix
14. johndoe74 - June 5, 2012. 13.5K/ 9 months. Phoenix
15. Matt Ferris - June 20, 2012. 15K/ 12 months. Dallas, Texas
16. Shrink - June 21, 2012. 10.2K/ 10.5 months. Phoenix (sold that Leaf, replaced w/leased '12 Leaf)
17. ravi100 - June 24, 2012. 13.1K/ 13.5 months. Southlake, Texas (no longer has Leaf)
18. ev4me - approx. June 1, 2012. 7K/ 15 mos. Phoenix (Dropped 2 bars)
19. jspearman - June 28, 2012, 12K/10.5 months. Phoenix
20. Leafwing - July 05, 2012, 13.5K/15 months, Plano, TX.
21. GerryAZ - July 05, 2012, ?/?, Phoenix
22. ecoobsessive - July 6, 2012, 13K/13 months, San Antonio, TX
23. jhm614 - May 15, 2012, 25K/14.5 months, Arlington, TX (2nd bar loss reported on 7/7/2012)
24. DarkDave - June 15, 2012. 8.5K/14.5 months. Phoenix
25. JasonT - July 14, 2012, 25.5K/15 months, Tuscon, AZ
26. Kolmstead - July 16,2012, 14.3K/19 months, Ridgecrest, CA
27. rjzastaury - June ? 2012, ?/12 months, Tuscon, AZ

Not reported by owner, but by others:
1. Opossum reported on another Phoenix car: Lost 1st bar @ 21.5K/ __ months. Lost 2nd bar 6/30/2012 @ 25.3K after 12 mos ownership. Lost 3rd bar 7/12/2012 @ 29.1K miles (from
viewtopic.php?f=30&t=8802&start=990#p210171and viewtopic.php?f=30&t=8802&start=1210#p212356and viewtopic.php?f=30&t=8802&start=1230#p212377
2. Leafkabob reported a street encounter with a Leaf owner who stated he lost a bar after about a year.
3. Skywagon approx. May, 2012. Phoenix (supposedly no longer has Leaf)
4. TomT's friend Tim (not on the forum), in Phoenix, lost 1st bar on 7/15/2012, at 13K miles/11 months (had car since August 2011).

 

[Volusiano]

I received an email from Nissan Consumer Affairs today asking me to fill out a survey for my recent contact with them (I think due to my calling in to register my complaint about the battery capacity loss).

I also received on the same day (probably just coincidence) a phone call from a Nissan Customer Loyalty Manager from Nissan Marketing, asking whether anyone from the Nissan dealership has gotten back to me yet to address the negative feedback that I gave the dealership for my recent 1 year battery checkup. I said "nope" and she seems surprised. Anyway, she asked me to clarify my issue with her, then she said I'll receive a very short survey from them via email after she hangs up and she asked me to fill it out. I did receive that follow up survey and I filled it out. I can tell by her comments when I explain my issue with the battery capacity that she's not well informed about the issue to make any statement about it, other than offering generic sympathy that I have an issue with their product.

The questions in both surveys are very generic although they did leave room to let you put in your own comments. I think this is probably just the Nissan gears cranking through responding to negative survey inputs to follow up.

 

[jspearman]

I received the survey, too, but no calls and no follow-up survey. I heard from another local Leaf owner that he also received one today. Any non-Phoenix people get the survey? The first question was, I think, would you recommend Nissan to a friend. Right now I had to say that was about 3/10. If we are the only people getting the survey, then I hope Nissan is starting to get their act together.

Volusiano, can you make it on Wednesday to meet with us? The more the merrier. I have to talk my wife out of the Leaf for the day so I can drive it there, and that's going to be a hard sell

 

[EdmondLeaf]

I got that survey about 3-4 wk ago

 

[shrink]

I received the survey, too, but no calls and no follow-up survey.

I got one, too, about 2 weeks ago and expressed my displeasure with the capacity loss. No follow-up, though.

 

[Stoaty]

I got a survey about my service at Nissan dealer in June (to have battery checked). While the dealer was great, I didn't give Nissan very high marks due to their (non) handling of the battery capacity degradation problems in hot climates (although not personally affected). The service guy had just purchased a Leaf a few weeks earlier, so I gave him a few pointers.