vrwl
Well-known member
leafwing said:
Leafwing, looks like we'll get lucky and see 5 temp bars again this weekend too.
Capacity Loss on 2011-2012 LEAFs
- Thread starter azdre
- Start date
Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:
Leafwing, looks like we'll get lucky and see 5 temp bars again this weekend too.
gaswalla
Well-known member
ALLWATZ said:Well, I have been waiting for this day, the dreaded second bar loss
P.S. still in the 100's here
P.S.S. putting in the emoticons does help!
very sad to hear about your capacity loss.. How far can you go now on a charge?
ALLWATZ
Well-known member
Thanks. Fortunately for us, right now, it is not a problem. The car is used for just around town and usually about 40 miles a day tops. Never have taken it to VLB or turtle modes so I can't say for a whole charge however, a couple of days ago, my wife came home having gone 42 miles and showed 9 miles left on the GOM(so probably a total range of 60 including reserve). As per Carwings data (we always hit accept), first 7-8 months would travel 800-860 miles a month, months 9-12 down to 700-750 (first bar loss) and lately putting just 600 miles a month (second bar loss). Obviously, when the range gets low, we just switch to and drive our other car.gaswalla said:ALLWATZ said:Well, I have been waiting for this day, the dreaded second bar loss
P.S. still in the 100's here
P.S.S. putting in the emoticons does help!
very sad to hear about your capacity loss.. How far can you go now on a charge?
GaslessInSeattle
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 6, 2011
- Messages
- 1,566
TonyWilliams said:
I guess it's too early to assume that the rapid accelerated decline in hot climates shows us a comparable if slower curve for the rest of the US. If the Phoenix Leaf's are showing that all Leaf batteries accelerate in decline as they age rather than plateau, Nissan will have a much larger problem on their hands. "Normal" range anxiety is challenging enough, a sense of accelerated downward spiral on top of that will make the car commercially unviable even with a larger battery, IMHO.
The Leaf needs a much larger battery to continue playing in the no TMS ball game.
My take on Andy Palmer interview several days ago
In the Andy Palmer interview, he states that since the average driving of an Arizonian Leafer is 7500 a year, it will lose near what was originally promised, only 24% in the first five years (instead of only 20%).
"to be clear, I'm answering as an engineer, I'm not criticizing, they use their car in a hotter climate in a very different way...on average, Mr. and Mrs. Arizona are doing about 7.5 K a year...if we take that data set and project that out to five years, Mr, Ms, Mistress Arizona are getting 76%...they don't go outside those norms. You can argue that those norms as defined by us are meeting customer expectations, that's a different discussion. There is the question of transparency, we made a decision from the very get go they we put a source of health meter on the gage".
To be clear, his stating "To be clear, I'm answering as an engineer" is a wonderful example of obfuscation [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obfuscation], a statement reflecting its opposite. His discussion clearly reflects a carefully crafted political statement to hide certain facts.
a. Out of the 450 cars driven in Arizona, there is a far far greater percentage of those who have lost more than 15% the first 12 months then Nissan has been declaring.
b. his referring to the average 7.5 K a year driven is not the average miles driving by Mr. and Mrs. (and Ms) Arizona (or Mr. America) driving the average car. The average is 12,500. This is not an expectation, its a norm and its a fact.
c. the reason that the average is 7.5 K is not because "they use their car in a hotter climate in a very different way" (as Mr. Palmer appears to infer), but because it is difficult (in my experience) to drive much more than that (though some have been able to with some charging station and work schedules that are more amenable to this). There are several reasons it is difficult for Mr. and Ms Arizona to drive the normal amount of miles with the car (more possible if the 100 range assurance was accurate). Some of these reasons are:
1. the hotter climate has caused problems with the battery capacity, so folks cannot drive the full promised range per charge.
2. Nissan has used implicit intimidation [e.g., you may be in violation of the warrantee] in making those losing a bar believe it is their fault
• for driving more the 7.5K
• driving on the highway (I was directly told by Nissan staff in my yearly checkup that the loss of my bar was my fault for driving on the highway, and I was made to feel that it was then my fault)
• charging higher then 80% (which you need to do to get where you want to go after the first year)
• fast charging, so they cannot drive very far on a 80% charge (especially after the first year).
d. Mr. Palmer appears to be inferring that if you drive outside the 7.5 K, you are driving outside the norm "as defined by us". While he says it's a different discussion if customers have other expectations, the truth is that it is not a different discussion, because as the norms "defined by Nissan" are not the norms of how people drive their cars in a year. Expectations are defined by what the norms actually are in the world, not Nissan's norms of convenience, i.e., Nissan is twisting the data they derived from those "pressing the OK button" to suit their own purposes. A wonderfully crafted political statement by an engineer of obfuscation. Now that's something we American's are used to, listening to the political scientists twist facts for their own purposes in this most political time of year.
In the Andy Palmer interview, he states that since the average driving of an Arizonian Leafer is 7500 a year, it will lose near what was originally promised, only 24% in the first five years (instead of only 20%).
"to be clear, I'm answering as an engineer, I'm not criticizing, they use their car in a hotter climate in a very different way...on average, Mr. and Mrs. Arizona are doing about 7.5 K a year...if we take that data set and project that out to five years, Mr, Ms, Mistress Arizona are getting 76%...they don't go outside those norms. You can argue that those norms as defined by us are meeting customer expectations, that's a different discussion. There is the question of transparency, we made a decision from the very get go they we put a source of health meter on the gage".
To be clear, his stating "To be clear, I'm answering as an engineer" is a wonderful example of obfuscation [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obfuscation], a statement reflecting its opposite. His discussion clearly reflects a carefully crafted political statement to hide certain facts.
a. Out of the 450 cars driven in Arizona, there is a far far greater percentage of those who have lost more than 15% the first 12 months then Nissan has been declaring.
b. his referring to the average 7.5 K a year driven is not the average miles driving by Mr. and Mrs. (and Ms) Arizona (or Mr. America) driving the average car. The average is 12,500. This is not an expectation, its a norm and its a fact.
c. the reason that the average is 7.5 K is not because "they use their car in a hotter climate in a very different way" (as Mr. Palmer appears to infer), but because it is difficult (in my experience) to drive much more than that (though some have been able to with some charging station and work schedules that are more amenable to this). There are several reasons it is difficult for Mr. and Ms Arizona to drive the normal amount of miles with the car (more possible if the 100 range assurance was accurate). Some of these reasons are:
1. the hotter climate has caused problems with the battery capacity, so folks cannot drive the full promised range per charge.
2. Nissan has used implicit intimidation [e.g., you may be in violation of the warrantee] in making those losing a bar believe it is their fault
• for driving more the 7.5K
• driving on the highway (I was directly told by Nissan staff in my yearly checkup that the loss of my bar was my fault for driving on the highway, and I was made to feel that it was then my fault)
• charging higher then 80% (which you need to do to get where you want to go after the first year)
• fast charging, so they cannot drive very far on a 80% charge (especially after the first year).
d. Mr. Palmer appears to be inferring that if you drive outside the 7.5 K, you are driving outside the norm "as defined by us". While he says it's a different discussion if customers have other expectations, the truth is that it is not a different discussion, because as the norms "defined by Nissan" are not the norms of how people drive their cars in a year. Expectations are defined by what the norms actually are in the world, not Nissan's norms of convenience, i.e., Nissan is twisting the data they derived from those "pressing the OK button" to suit their own purposes. A wonderfully crafted political statement by an engineer of obfuscation. Now that's something we American's are used to, listening to the political scientists twist facts for their own purposes in this most political time of year.
Expecting my second bar to disappear any day now. There was no response from Nissan customer support from the initial bar loss report or the emails. Sadly, it took a complaint to BBB seems to get their attention and now they are to schedule a checkup of the car. Will update on the status once it is scheduled.
Hoping that Nissan will address my core concern about range somehow as my commute puts it in LBW on a regular basis now and I can't afford any further range loss.
Hoping that Nissan will address my core concern about range somehow as my commute puts it in LBW on a regular basis now and I can't afford any further range loss.
scottf200
Well-known member
Not exactly sure what cost effective buys you if you can't sell the car in higher quantities. So both in general.leafwing said:
LARGER: to get to an EPA 100, IMO. And probably at a lower cost (leases will help with that).
BEV:It would seem that every BEV maker/competitor will make a even bigger deal of it now and point to the 2011-2013 LEAF as an example of why. Even if A123 or someone else makes a production version that handles heat better that will take a year [or 2 summers] to prove it. [PHEV will probably be dragged into this discussion as well and they will point out they have TMS].
WetEV
Well-known member
leafwing said:
In Prince Rupert, BC or in Phoenix AZ?
planet4ever
Well-known member
Obviously it depends partly on the cost of the modules and the cost of the TMS, and I don't know either. But one thing I do know: The TMS robs energy while the extra modules don't. Even if you insulate the pack and run the TMS only when the car is plugged in, it still uses more energy from the wall, and someone is going to end up paying for that. If you add more modules, you can get the same range while not pushing the battery to its extremes, and surely that will have some payback in itself, in longer life if not greater efficiency.leafwing said:
Ray
JPWhite
Well-known member
leiko49 said:
Classic.
Not only do we have Nissan Years (TM) we now have Nissan Norms (TM)
:mrgreen:
Except that if heat is the main issue then you'll just have a large pack degrading the same percentage from heat. Yes you'll still be left with more range but it doesn't really address the core problem. Plus by driving around with a larger pack, i.e. more weight you'll actually be a little less efficient. I think it's worth using some energy from a TMS, with this chemistry, even if you get a larger pack. Frankly a cooling system should not be that expensive or difficult to build.planet4ever said:
JPWhite
Well-known member
JRP3 said:
Not necessarily. A battery will degrade faster at higher SOC%. The LEAF utilizes a much larger % of the pack than other vehicles, like the Prius for example. I believe the combination of High SOC/deep cycling and heat is what is wilting the LEAF's in AZ.
A shallower cycle with more in hidden reserve will help slow the degradation and also (as you point out) mask the problem.
I agree with you however that this may not be the cheapest or best approach to solving the issue. Optional TMS would go a long way IMHO.
mwalsh said:
Never really concerns me as long as I am near a gas station. I'll just fill up with unleaded and be on my way. Which side is the gas cap on? I always forget!
(The straight forward answer is: Yes there is more range after 1 bar, but I prefer not to take chances here in the desert.)
All I was attempting to do was to estimate what a NON "range anxiety" range for my vehicle would be after 15 months of ownership under the following scientific conditions: NONE. I drove it as a mass produced car should be driven (calmly and conservatively) and got a result of 45 miles at 4.5m/kw (14 highway/39 city). I did this originally when the car was about 4 months old and got 62 miles. From the several non-scientific range tests I have done, it seems I have lost between 15% and 20% capacity from new. No worries though as Nissan considers this normal after the fact. Can't wait to have a dead battery pack when my Lemon LEAF turns 30 to 36 months old. If I rip the battery pack out at this point, the car may be light enough for me to propel it Flintstone stye. http://youtu.be/gdX6fwfrULI?t=5s" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; I won't have any other choice since I have a 5 year loan on the car.
I just wanted a car. I got a golf cart.
Stoaty
Well-known member
New theory from Nissan: Phoenix Summer Drivers (TM)
Reasoning:
1) Mark Perry stated that the problem with the rapid loss of capacity bars in Phoenix was due to the higher than expected mileage of Phoenix drivers and the fact that they drive at higher speeds than the LA4 cycle
2) There were multiple reports of lost capacity bars during the summer, but now that it is over reports of lost capacity bars have dropped way off
The Only Possible Conclusion: Phoenix Leaf owners must drive a lot more miles in the summer than during other seasons, and at much higher speeds.
Does anyone see any holes in the PSD theory?
Reasoning:
1) Mark Perry stated that the problem with the rapid loss of capacity bars in Phoenix was due to the higher than expected mileage of Phoenix drivers and the fact that they drive at higher speeds than the LA4 cycle
2) There were multiple reports of lost capacity bars during the summer, but now that it is over reports of lost capacity bars have dropped way off
The Only Possible Conclusion: Phoenix Leaf owners must drive a lot more miles in the summer than during other seasons, and at much higher speeds.
Does anyone see any holes in the PSD theory?
DaveinOlyWA
Well-known member
planet4ever said:
that is a good question and forgive me if it was posted but does anyone know what TaylorSF's degradation was? last i talked with him, he was borrowing a SOC meter to check his. he had thought he had lost about 10% so this info might be a good baseline on degradation per cycling only.
up until very recently, he had only charged L2 at home and work. he states that on days where he has to vary his route he needs to stop off at Tumwater DCFC to get a boost due the range loss. keep in mind, with a 65 mile commute, he was very near the range limit anyway.
as far as the "AZ' penalty that penalty applies nearly everywhere. when it gets cold here, we also have the range degradation. does nt matter if its permanent or temporary, we still have it.
i would have to think that TMS will slow degradation but will it slow it enough? maybe i am wrong but i get the distinct impression that the general board consensus is that TMS is the answer to all the problems and that is simply not true
It may indeed be the most cost effective solution at this point in time. Cool the pack in the hot areas, reducing capacity loss, and heat the pack in colder areas, reducing cold weather range loss. In the absence of better battery chemistry and/or a significantly larger pack it's probably the only solution.
GaslessInSeattle
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 6, 2011
- Messages
- 1,566
my conclusion at this point is that TMS is a must practically everywhere. Even for a moderate climate like the Pacific Northwest the winters get cold, robbing range and there are hot spots in the summer time leading to worry and avoidance... having to constantly calculate range and adjust habits with the vacillation of season and geography is just to tedious for mass market adoption, IMHO. TMS helps create more of a constant on which to develop an enjoyable rhythm of use.
JRP3 said:
Similar threads
