Capacity Loss on 2011-2012 LEAFs

[JRP3]

In the video he says "we worked on the assumption of 12,500", referring to miles per year.

 

[spooka]

In the video he says "we worked on the assumption of 12,500", referring to miles per year.

For AZ it's 7,500.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=R1tfX7fRWPI#t=193s" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[JRP3]

Right but I was just pointing out the discrepancy. They assumed 12.5K per year in general, but never expressed lower than average miles only for AZ when marketing the vehicle that I'm aware of.

 

[surfingslovak]

Right but I was just pointing out the discrepancy. They assumed 12.5K per year in general, but never expressed lower than average miles only for AZ when marketing the vehicle that I'm aware of.

I think they are not making a prediction about individual outcomes in Phoenix, just countering the claim that the batteries don't last in AZ. If you take the projected fleet average in Phoenix and compare it to the manual, it's going to be only a few percentage points off. I could be wrong, but I believe that is the intent of that statement.

 

[cwerdna]

As an FYI, link to spooka's FB comment (and which shows Nissan Leaf's FB post) is at:
https://www.facebook.com/nissanleaf/posts/356321484457644?comment_id=9355299&offset=0&total_comments=5" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[Cheezmo]

He also says that 7,500 is "a little bit less" than 12,500.

I guess a battery pack with 60% capacity has "a little bit less" capacity than one with 100% too.

 

[spooka]

Right but I was just pointing out the discrepancy. They assumed 12.5K per year in general, but never expressed lower than average miles only for AZ when marketing the vehicle that I'm aware of.

I think they are not making a prediction about individual outcomes in Phoenix, just countering the claim that the batteries don't last in AZ. If you take the projected fleet average in Phoenix and compare it to the manual, it's going to be only a few percentage points off. I could be wrong, but I believe that is the intent of that statement.

He states that the average AZ LEAF will be at 76% capacity in 5 years. Chelsea Sexton follows up by stating "based on 7,500 miles per year". Any Palmer confirms. He is actually confirming (not countering) that batteries don't last as long in AZ. Actually, to be at 80% after 5 years as Nissan stated we would be in AZ, you would need to drive closer to 7,125 miles a year (as Nissan continues to state that mileage is the main culprit in AZ capacity loss cases). They keep spinning these BS numbers round and round.

I believe that this is the item many of us have been seeking. This non disclosure of a 20 mile per day limit is cause for non-conformity as Nissan advertised a 100 mile range and secretly knew we would be killing our batteries way before their 5 year estimate. It would be reasonable to assume that if Nissan had disclosed this information, LEAF sales in AZ would have been ZERO or darn close to it.

Who knew what and when did they know it? If Nissan sold these cars in hot climates knowing this info, it would have to be considered fraud.

 

[Stoaty]

I think they are not making a prediction about individual outcomes in Phoenix, just countering the claim that the batteries don't last in AZ. If you take the projected fleet average in Phoenix and compare it to the manual, it's going to be only a few percentage points off. I could be wrong, but I believe that is the intent of that statement.

True, but that is a post hoc observation based on driving distances gleaned from those who pressed "OK" (and who knows how much of the time owners pressed OK?). They are saying, "We lucked out, because the Arizona drivers aren't driving as much as other geographic locations so they aren't very far below the 80% norm." It is basically an admission that Leafs in Phoenix will woefully under perform for battery capacity retention compared to the "norm" when compared on a level playing field.

 

[spooka]

True, but that is a post hoc observation based on driving distances gleaned from those who pressed "OK" (and who knows how much of the time owners pressed OK?). They are saying, "We lucked out, because the Arizona drivers aren't driving as much as other geographic locations so they aren't very far below the 80% norm." It is basically an admission that Leafs in Phoenix will woefully under perform for battery capacity retention compared to the "norm" when compared on a level playing field.

I'm not so sure Andy Palmer is referring to only LEAF drivers when he states "Mr Arizona". I believe he means the average of all AZ drivers is 7,500 miles per year (not just the 400 LEAFs they have data on). Listen again and let me know your thoughts.

 

[vrwl]

I'm not so sure Andy Palmer is referring to only LEAF drivers when he states "Mr Arizona". I believe he means the average of all AZ drivers is 7,500 miles per year (not just the 400 LEAFs they have data on). Listen again and let me know your thoughts.

I didn't take it that way. I understood it to mean specifically LEAF owners in AZ (the ones that had to push the "OK" button for the Carwings communication because that's where the data came from).

 

[surfingslovak]

It is basically an admission that Leafs in Phoenix will woefully under perform for battery capacity retention compared to the "norm" when compared on a level playing field.

As much as I don't want to entertain more speculation, there must be an upper limit, which can be projected with reasonable accuracy when you have the right data. I don't think that driving additional 5,000 miles annually for five years will add more than 10% to the total degradation figure. That's just an educated guess, and it could be less than that as well.

 

[Stoaty]

As much as I don't want to entertain more speculation, there must be an upper limit, which can be projected with reasonable accuracy when you have the right data. I don't think that driving additional 5,000 miles annually for five years will add more than 10% to the total degradation figure. That's just an educated guess, and it could be less than that as well.

That may very well be true--but it would mean that Phoenix owners would have up to a 34% loss of capacity (retain 66% of capacity) at 5 years. In other words, they would pass the 70% "end of life" mark before 5 years, compared to 10 years for the mythical norm. That's a big difference.

Another interesting aspect of all of the information from Nissan is the strong suggestion that driving slower and more efficiently will preserve battery capacity. I have been doing this to save energy, but it appears there may be some additional benefits (although I have no idea of how much the difference is quantitatively). I'm not sure if the benefit would be from less cycling of the pack, or less heat buildup from lower power usage.

 

[palmermd]

Perhaps this is part of the problem. Maybe Nissan did all their "real world" testing on the LA4 cycle. That is why they used it on all their advertising. Maybe the hot weather testing was also all done on this cycle. But that is not how Americans drive. We have lots of freeways and so we are much harder on the batteries than an LA4 cycle. I have only 9000 miles on my Leaf after 18 months or so. But I too do lots of freeway driving.

It just makes me wonder if this constant steady draw from the batteries is something that Nissan overlooked in their battery testing. It is quite common for us to drive this way and not common in other parts of the world. They have hinted at this in their recent comments about the freeways in Arizona.

ha...I feel redeemed. Andy clearly stated that they did all their testing and projections for life based on the LA4 cycle and 12,500 miles/year. He later stated that the things that will degrade a battery faster are driving high speeds continuously, high temperatures, frequent fast charging, more mileage. Most normal drivers in the US will not drive the LA4 cycle since we have so many freeways. If I remember correctly the LA4 cycle only has a maximum speed of 55mph for a few seconds, most of it is 35mph or less (city driving) and lots of chances for the battery to rest.

So for folks in Arizona, they will likely break the first rule all the time while also breaking the high temperature rule, and if you drive over 12,500 you are also breaking that rule, so your rate of deterioration will certainly be quicker...it would have been nice to know this at the time of purchase.

The other thing he keeps dancing around is the fact that there are lots of examples of freeway drivers with high mileage who are not in hot climates and have not seen the level of deterioration. To me this shows that the number one driver of the deterioration is the heat. They do not want to admit to this so they include all the other reasons, which while true, are really just there as a distraction since they do not factor in as much as the heat.

 

[RegGuheert]

ha...I feel redeemed. Andy clearly stated that they did all their testing and projections for life based on the LA4 cycle and 12,500 miles/year.

Me, too!

How did they test the battery? If I had to take a guess, I would say they probably used the LA4-equivalent battery cycle they are so fond of since it makes the LEAF into a 100-mile vehicle. IF, and that's a big IF, Nissan uses that cycle for testing the batteries, then their capacity-after-so-many-years projections are basically worthless for Phoenix. The reason is that Phoenix is one big superhighway (sorry Phoenicians!) where most people drive very fast and therefore consume energy at high power. Phoenix<>LA4!!

But that doesn't answer the question of why Nissan told TickTock something different:

This data is not LA4, but rather a 32.2A discharge rate to better match 55mph discharge rate.

I will say that the video was pretty well done. Thanks to Nissan and to Chelsea for putting that together!

That said, I'm having a little difficulty reconciling the following two statements by Andy Palmer in the video:

There is a degradation of all batteries over life. It's straightforward physics and chemistry.

and

We never imagined that there would be a customer, and apparently there is, uh, where, who would, say, at the end of five years of life, that they would want to bring their state-of-health of the battery back up to 100%, and therefore buy a battery.

I'm sorry, but that simply does not compute, particularly on a vehicle which is intended to be eco-friendly but has a quite limited range to begin with.

Note the comment that 80% at 5 years is a worldwide number:

...basically, the mean line says that after five years of normal usage, uh, that you'd be at 80% state-of-health, five years in, and ten years in you'd be at 70. O.K. So you can see it's basically nonlinear. O.K., now, that's the norm. So that's mister average somewhere in the world.

So is customer satisfaction for the Nissan LEAF really better than the Chevy Volt? If so, that's awesome!

Of all the cars that we sell, LEAF is the, has the most satisfied customers: approval ratings at or above 95%.

 

[leafkabob]

Perhaps this is part of the problem. Maybe Nissan did all their "real world" testing on the LA4 cycle. That is why they used it on all their advertising. Maybe the hot weather testing was also all done on this cycle. But that is not how Americans drive. We have lots of freeways and so we are much harder on the batteries than an LA4 cycle. I have only 9000 miles on my Leaf after 18 months or so. But I too do lots of freeway driving.

It just makes me wonder if this constant steady draw from the batteries is something that Nissan overlooked in their battery testing. It is quite common for us to drive this way and not common in other parts of the world. They have hinted at this in their recent comments about the freeways in Arizona.

ha...I feel redeemed. Andy clearly stated that they did all their testing and projections for life based on the LA4 cycle and 12,500 miles/year. He later stated that the things that will degrade a battery faster are driving high speeds continuously, high temperatures, frequent fast charging, more mileage. Most normal drivers in the US will not drive the LA4 cycle since we have so many freeways. If I remember correctly the LA4 cycle only has a maximum speed of 55mph for a few seconds, most of it is 35mph or less (city driving) and lots of chances for the battery to rest.

So for folks in Arizona, they will likely break the first rule all the time while also breaking the high temperature rule, and if you drive over 12,500 you are also breaking that rule, so your rate of deterioration will certainly be quicker...it would have been nice to know this at the time of purchase.

The other thing he keeps dancing around is the fact that there are lots of examples of freeway drivers with high mileage who are not in hot climates and have not seen the level of deterioration. To me this shows that the number one driver of the deterioration is the heat. They do not want to admit to this so they include all the other reasons, which while true, are really just there as a distraction since they do not factor in as much as the heat.

+1 Thank you for this post. Nicely said!

 

[opossum]

This video just fills me with more rage!!! :evil: I can't wait to pick it apart this weekend...

 

[09Bamb00]

So now my 80% charge range is 59.7 miles. I start with 10 bars and end with 1 bar. Loose the first bar before I've traveled 7 miles. Average speed is 26.6 mph. All this with no AC. :shock: It is incrediably muggy !!! TG, I have curly hair otherwise I'd arrive at work with a bad-hair-day everyday. Should have purchased a golf cart for EV, or better kept my Geo which while gas got 50 mpg even on the highway. Very sad.

 

[spooka]

So now my 80% charge range is 59.7 miles. I start with 10 bars and end with 1 bar. Loose the first bar before I've traveled 7 miles. Average speed is 26.6 mph. All this with no AC. :shock: It is incrediably muggy !!! TG, I have curly hair otherwise I'd arrive at work with a bad-hair-day everyday. Should have purchased a golf cart for EV, or better kept my Geo which while gas got 50 mpg even on the highway. Very sad.

I did an 80% test drive yesterday to LBW or 1 bar. Got 45 miles at 4.5 kw/h. Fred Flintstone could do better with his car.

 

[mwalsh]

I did an 80% test drive yesterday to LBW or 1 bar. Got 45 miles at 4.5 kw/h. Fred Flintstone could do better with his car.

You do understand that after LBW you still have at least 12 miles left, right?

 

[mkjayakumar]

Doesn't matter. LBW is where I don't feel safe driving after that..