How should Nissan respond to dropping capacity?

[smkettner]

We will not get an idea what is normal until some coastal cars lose the first bar.
Then we will start to know the half life due to excessive heat.
Some of us may only be a month or two behind... time will tell very soon.

 

[mwalsh]

We will not get an idea what is normal until some coastal cars lose the first bar.
Then we will start to know the half life due to excessive heat.
Some of us may only be a month or two behind... time will tell very soon.

Trying to decide if I'd like the dubious honor of being first. But realistically (temp-wise) it should probably be someone out in the IE or the Valley.

 

[QueenBee]

An linear extrapolation of 15% per year means that just 3 years from now most LEAFs in Phoenix will have 50% capacity
at which point you would probably have to replace the pack.

At what point does the capacity decline so much that the pack is no longer able to output the same power levels? Since power output is warrantied that might be another way to have Nissan cover the lost capacity under the existing warranty.

 

[Nubo]

I signed all the warnings and advisements.

What they boil down to is:
1 - There is no battery capacity-life warranty of any kind.
2 - Nissan think that 80% after 5 years is normal for a well-cared-for battery in normal conditions but they won't guarantee it. (practically meaningless).
3 - Nissan think that there are multiple reasons why an individual's conditions may not be normal.
4 - Nissan gives no guidance as to the degree of degradation that can be expected due to abnormal conditions other than listing some of the conditions.

That in and of itself is a recipe for poor sales as real-world results come in. I sure hope Nissan's engineers (not just their marketeers) are frantically busy figuring out how they're going to improve this situation -- for the sake of the LEAF and for the sake of EV and Nissan reputation.

In a legal sense I think it's legitimate to ask the infamous question "What did they know, and when did they know it"? If Nissan had demonstrable evidence that this degree of rapid degradation would occur, and did not pass it on, then I think the "anything's possible" disclaimers don't necessarily protect them.

Imho, it's in Nissan's best interest to be as forthcoming as they can possibly be on this situation.

 

[klapauzius]

I heard this eve that Nissan will be issuing "bar" stickers to AZ LEAF owners, these removable stickers will go over the capacity display and add an additional bar. This is of course a temp fix until owners can get the capacity meter reset back to full. This will solve the issue and all owners that get the sticker in the mail will also be advised to put their tires to 100 PSI to even things out.

I'm glad this is finally resolved!

It might be funny (for now), but how many people can be convinced by this to get an EV? Of course the best jokes are always the ones at other peoples expense.....

This whole business "you whiners are not man enough to drive a $40k car, that will be use- (and worthless) in four years" is
not exactly a brilliant sales point.

I am not taking much solace from being in a temperate climate, because when the LEAF as a whole fails, I wont
be getting a cheap replacement battery when its "bar"-sticker time up here.

 

[Stoaty]

Here is a prescient post from 2010 by Darryl Siry (formerly with Tesla):

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/01/nissan-leaf-2/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[LEAFfan]

An linear extrapolation of 15% per year means that just 3 years from now most LEAFs in Phoenix will have 50% capacity
at which point you would probably have to replace the pack.
I think at this point they would have to do something, or this will turn into a PR nightmare. I guess we will know a year from now...

The capacity bars aren't linear so after 3 years it could have at least lost 28%,but 2 drivers have lost their second bar already for a 21.25% loss.

 

[klapauzius]

An linear extrapolation of 15% per year means that just 3 years from now most LEAFs in Phoenix will have 50% capacity
at which point you would probably have to replace the pack.
I think at this point they would have to do something, or this will turn into a PR nightmare. I guess we will know a year from now...

The capacity bars aren't linear so after 3 years it could have at least lost 28%,but 2 drivers have lost their second bar already for a 21.25% loss.

I know the bars are not linear. What I meant is to assume that the 15% degradation rate stays constant for the next few years.
That might be actually an optimistic assumption....
At 21.25% per year, 50% will be reached in a mere 2.8 years and after 5 you have 30% capacity
(rather than 80%) :shock: .

I think that would be the end of it (the Leaf).
Lets hope that these are extreme cases and that it is only the excessive heat.

 

[Herm]

I know the bars are not linear. What I meant is to assume that the 15% degradation rate stays constant for the next few years.

100% the first year
85% the second year
72% the third year
61% the fourth year
52% the fifth year

As you can see the losses slow down after a while, but since you now have a smaller pack it will be worked harder to do your daily commute and may begin to deteriorate even faster. By then internal resistance will have risen so high (maybe) that your acceleration will be affected and the Nissan battery warranty takes effect. The last two bars are marked red so thats probably when it happens.

 

[smkettner]

What percent are the last two bars?
I assume the last two are red because the car will not operate properly.

 

[Herm]

Of course the best jokes are always the ones at other peoples expense.....

The best jokes always have a grain of truth behind them..

I was one of the guys dissing Darryl Siry back then..

 

[TNleaf]

This whole business "you whiners are not man enough to drive a $40k car, that will be use- (and worthless) in four years" is
not exactly a brilliant sales point.

This is not directly at you klapauzius, but I've seen it come up in this thread a few times.

Why is it that when someone has something negative to say about the LEAF it's all of a sudden a "$40k car" ?

I expect it from all of the ICE driving nay-sayers (especially when I decide to read any comments on online articles about EVs and lose more faith in humanity ie, "f@#%ing tree hugger OBAMA CAR!"), but not from LEAF drivers that are now having issues or are unhappy with their current situation.

I understand that AFTER tax the car approaches the $40k mark... but if you are going to do after tax, then why did you not include after rebates? I view my LEAF as a sub $26k car, since that's what I paid at the end of the day (after tax and rebates).

Anyways, my OT point being, the LEAF is a $40k car when someone has a complaint, it seems. Funny how that works.

Back on topic...

In a legal sense I think it's legitimate to ask the infamous question "What did they know, and when did they know it"? If Nissan had demonstrable evidence that this degree of rapid degradation would occur, and did not pass it on, then I think the "anything's possible" disclaimers don't necessarily protect them.

Imho, it's in Nissan's best interest to be as forthcoming as they can possibly be on this situation.

I think this is a valid question. If it turns out Nissan really did know more than they let on over a year ago, I would be severely disappointed. Regardless, as more people report their capacity losses (including the non-hot regions), I think the data and information will start to become a lot more transparent, and we will be relying much less on estimates/extrapolations.

 

[GaslessInSeattle]

I remember an interview with Elon Musk, who was sure Nissan would take it in the shorts for it's decision to not include a TMS, looks to me at this point like he was correct. With multiple Leafs now with 2 lost capacity bars, I think we are seeing the tip of a PR iceberg for Nissan.

Thought I'd highlight the most relevant part of your link: "Thermal management in lithium-ion battery packs is critical to the long-term performance and quality of the battery. The manganese oxide pack is sensitive to high temperature and the primary consequence is that the pack will degrade more rapidly than one with active thermal management. This problem will be worse in hotter climates such as Phoenix, which Nissan has selected as one of its launch cities.

Mark Perry, Nissan’s director of product planning for the United States, dismissed the importance of active thermal management."

Here is a prescient post from 2010 by Darryl Siry (formerly with Tesla):

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/01/nissan-leaf-2/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

the 64 million $ question to me is, what is the threshold temperature for capacity loss and is it an average, or a peak? With Quick charging here in a cooler climate, it's possible to moderate the thermal effect almost completely, I'd just like to know how cautious I need to be.

 

[cwerdna]

What percent are the last two bars?
I assume the last two are red because the car will not operate properly.

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/wiki/index.php?title=Battery,_Charging_System#Battery_Capacity_Behavior" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[shrink]

Why is it that when someone has something negative to say about the LEAF it's all of a sudden a "$40k car" ?

I understand that AFTER tax the car approaches the $40k mark... but if you are going to do after tax, then why did you not include after rebates? I view my LEAF as a sub $26k car, since that's what I paid at the end of the day (after tax and rebates).

Because when you sign the papers they say $40,000+ and that is what you are legally bound to pay, and because not everyone, including those who think they do, qualifies for the full tax credit. And because you have to wait until tax time to see whatever credit you may or may not get while you are still liable for $40,000 on a depreciating asset.

Not everyone lives in a temperate climate and qualifies for the tax credits for your identical $26k car.

 

[shrink]

When I read "24 hours in 120 temp" that was a clear indicator of trouble for AZ. Did that not concern any buyers that 24 hours in a temp like that could damage the pack?

That's interesting you were so certain it would be trouble for AZ when it is not 120 degrees for 24 hours here and Nissan chose this area as a launch market.

Please post a pic of your battery capacity replacement sticker when you get it.

Thanks for your clairvoyant hindsight support. I'm certain with support like this in the EV community, EV adoption will blossom. I mean who wouldn't want a car that loses 15-20% range after less than a year when following manufacturer "long-life" guidelines?

 

[Boomer23]

Here is a prescient post from 2010 by Darryl Siry (formerly with Tesla):

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/01/nissan-leaf-2/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Mark Perry is quoted in this article as saying:

“We don’t need thermal management for the U.S., but we are looking at the technology for Dubai and other locations like that….

Here's a link to the climate stats for Dubai on Wikipedia. Looks like Phoenix might be hotter than Dubai. Mark Perry might have chosen his words better:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_of_Dubai" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[shrink]

Everyone, I respect your opinions, but you have to admit, that is what they are. The data presented here is anecdotal."

So how about that trade now? You can have my anecdotal 11 capacity bar LEAF. It's only 10-1/2 months old, 10,200 miles - a third less than yours.

I'll even pay shipping for BOTH cars.

You simply cannot lose.

 

[Pipcecil]

I still believe Nissan was being disingenuous. Yes, it was a gamble to purchase, but we are not beta testers, any product I buy should work, as intended. Overall consumerings buying products that "will get fixed" or "get better overtime as we make patchs/updates/fixes" mentality is entirely asine to me, and companies should have actions brought against them for selling products that do not meeting the standard requirements.

As for the leaf, I did a TON of research before I bought. I was ok with a 20%-30% loss in 8-10 years. I was ok with the revised 20% loss in 5 years. Those are the numbers given, and those I accepted. 15% loss in one year? I would have never accepted that. Yes, it could end up only being 5% more in 4 years equaling 20% in 5 (which I was OK with), but such a quick loss so fast is unacceptable to me.

Imagine the revese, a 500 mile range ICE car looses so much efficency because the gas engine doesn't work as well after 1 year and only goes 425 miles, max, you would see lawsuits flying everywhere. That loss for a new vehicle is completely unacceptable, so why should it be OK if its for an EV? No, its a car, it has to work as a car. I am lucky, my work has level 2 chargers, but with a 15% loss, I probably wouldn't be able to make the round trip in winter anymore without chargers, how sad (fyi its only 55 miles round trip).

There is many disclaimers that in cold, you get less range. So cold climate people knew this before buying, why didn't the hot climate people get warnings of, "battery capacity loss will be greater than normal, and potential significant loss capacity (15%) in one year."

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

for people who are approaching a 20+% loss, what would you have Nissan do now?

1) replace the battery in anticipation of a linear loss based on what you have lost to this point? (iow, replace a tranny before it blows up because it does not "seem" to run right but still gets you down the road?)

wow, after rereading #1, any other point becomes useless. i think at this point Moderator, we need to suspend the thread until Feb 1st. by then we should have a handful of people with more than 20% loss.

now, all you Phoenicians may think i am being funny because i sit here with a measured 280 GID this morning but that is far from the truth.

we all have examples of companies that had known issues with a product that were not addressed simply because it was not convenient to do so. and ya!!

NEWSFLASH

companies do what is convenient to them, not u. even if Nissan knew there was a problem (and this has already been discussed, so nothing new here) their option is to

1) replace the pack now, before its really needed at a much higher expense taking from an already constrained supply

2) tell the customer that they will address the issue on Feb 1st because then the supply line will have extra packs from the TN plant (guessing they maybe tweaked a bit) where replacement will be MUCH cheaper for Nissan

now, why would they not tell us this now? i deal in customer service and patience and understanding is completely unheard of. a company cannot imply any future action without a shitstorm from the customer. in this day and age, every word out of place is magified a million times within minutes.

be it FB, Twitter, whatever, any controversy no matter how small will get out of control. so the corporate policy is say NOTHING.

now, is this the best policy? well to be honest with ya; yes it is.

in the grand scheme of things, it does not matter how quickly things get done, only the end result.

how many people stood in line to get Windows 98 (or whatever version if there was a version that did not have this) and install it only to find out they really could not browse until they downloaded about 50,000 security updates? great if you have high speed internet...(which i did not) sucks if you didnt and the download took 10 hours (true story) ok, MS realized this and said, oh we send u a disk. but that was not revealed until you actually bought the disk. would have been nice to have been able to order the disk ahead of time. so i downloaded the file and ordered the update disk which took a few weeks or more to arrive but MS did what they needed to do but at their convenience.

but if Nissan continues with this tact, by early 2013, the noise generated by people who have loss will be out there right at the same time that Leafs will actually be available to drive off in. (order sales % is like 20) impulse sales is like 50% so we want a Leaf in each color on the lot to pick from and drive off in. waiting for a car sucks... we all know that.

so, we have a bundle of grumps, who are finally addressed by Nissan who will no doubt do what they can to advertise that fact; grumps become happies, Nissan Cred jumps. they emphasize that 95% of the country has healthy battery pack without replacement and that they are offering $1000 rebates on 2013's...

so what the general public sees is Nissan bending over backwards to replace these packs that cost $20,000 (stay with me here!) all in the name of "standing behind their product"

when in reality, the packs are now US built and the cost is probably less than 25% of the packs being replaced. also keep in mind; most packs will probably only have a few modules replaced. now, we know better but do you honestly think the general public does?

there is a lot of ways to look at this situation and lets be realistic. Nissan knew what would happen, PERIOD

you all think Nissan is a crook, i personally think Nissan is in the middle of pulling off one of the greatest publicity stunts of all time