LEAFfan
Well-known member
patrick0101 said:Here is my battery replacement plan: drive car for 10 years, trade in, buy new car.
That sounds like a great plan Pat! If I had bought, I would probably do the same.
I Beat EPA's 2.9 Miles/KWh : Report Your Monthly Mileage
- Thread starter evnow
- Start date
Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:
That sounds like a great plan Pat! If I had bought, I would probably do the same.
JPWhite
Well-known member
patrick0101 said:Here is my battery replacement plan: drive car for 10 years, trade in, buy new car.
Precisely!!
edatoakrun
Well-known member
As posted on this thread:
http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=5423" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
My carwings energy reports and m/kWh are now CORRECT post NTB11-041 update, except for a 2.5% constant under reporting of "miles driven", and probably m/kWh as well. So the CW rankings for my car below:
Your rank for the past 12 months
Month and Year Grade Rank Energy Economy
May/2011 Gold 492
5.4 miles/kWh
Jun/2011 Gold 695
5.7 miles/kWh
Jul/2011 Gold 1651
5.3 miles/kWh
Aug/2011 Bronze 3622
4.2 miles/kWh
Sep/2011 Silver 3457
4.5 miles/kWh
Numbers above are way off for May-July (I had the update done on 8/3) and I believe they should still be corrected by 2.5% for August and september, to 4.3 and 4.6, respectively.
My dash (incorrect?) still says 4.3 m/kWh since delivery, and my nav screen history (correct?) still shows 4.4.
I don't understand why folks seem to like to complain about CW, rather than getting it (close to, in my experience) fixed.
http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=5423" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
My carwings energy reports and m/kWh are now CORRECT post NTB11-041 update, except for a 2.5% constant under reporting of "miles driven", and probably m/kWh as well. So the CW rankings for my car below:
Your rank for the past 12 months
Month and Year Grade Rank Energy Economy
May/2011 Gold 492
5.4 miles/kWh
Jun/2011 Gold 695
5.7 miles/kWh
Jul/2011 Gold 1651
5.3 miles/kWh
Aug/2011 Bronze 3622
4.2 miles/kWh
Sep/2011 Silver 3457
4.5 miles/kWh
Numbers above are way off for May-July (I had the update done on 8/3) and I believe they should still be corrected by 2.5% for August and september, to 4.3 and 4.6, respectively.
My dash (incorrect?) still says 4.3 m/kWh since delivery, and my nav screen history (correct?) still shows 4.4.
I don't understand why folks seem to like to complain about CW, rather than getting it (close to, in my experience) fixed.
DaveinOlyWA
Well-known member
In a nutshell.
Long term battery replacement cost is unavailable by any means.
Module replacement only helps to insure that Nissan USA doing everything in their power to reduce the cost as much as possible
Long term battery replacement cost is unavailable by any means.
Module replacement only helps to insure that Nissan USA doing everything in their power to reduce the cost as much as possible
evnow
Well-known member
Back on topic - here is my Sep report. Late this time - had to compile data from the mails I send myself daily. My Leaf m/kWh and wall-to-wheel m/kWh went down by 0.1 compared to August. I guess October will be further down as we are now back to normal Seattle weather - "cloudy with a good chance of rain"
evnow
Well-known member
Month : Oct-2011
a. 708 Miles
b. 199 kWh (Wall - Blink)
c. 3.6 Miles/kWh (Wall)
d. 4.6 Miles/kWh (Leaf)
e. ? (CarWings)
f. $21
g. 3 Cents/Mile
a. 708 Miles
b. 199 kWh (Wall - Blink)
c. 3.6 Miles/kWh (Wall)
d. 4.6 Miles/kWh (Leaf)
e. ? (CarWings)
f. $21
g. 3 Cents/Mile
evnow
Well-known member
Wow - you got the exact same mpk I got - both Leaf & wall !camasleaf said:
LEAFfan
Well-known member
Month : OCT-2011
a. 688 Miles
b. 123 kW h-Wall/Blink
c. 5.6 Miles/kW h-Wall/Blink
d. 6.4 Miles/kW h-Dash
e. 9.4 Miles/kW h-CarWings
f. $0.00 ($12.30 w/o PVs)
g. 0 Cents/Mile (1.7 Cents/Mile w/o PVs)
a. 688 Miles
b. 123 kW h-Wall/Blink
c. 5.6 Miles/kW h-Wall/Blink
d. 6.4 Miles/kW h-Dash
e. 9.4 Miles/kW h-CarWings
f. $0.00 ($12.30 w/o PVs)
g. 0 Cents/Mile (1.7 Cents/Mile w/o PVs)
Is anyone on the MNL forums "Stuart658" on Carwings? Curious because I've seen him multiple times on the rankings with 20+ m/kWh, and I've wondered if this is a fluke or if he's just an excellent hypermiler.
My numbers for OCT-2011:
a. 365 miles
b. 64.93 kWh Wall (Blink)
c. 5.62 miles/kWh Wall(Blink)
e. 7.1 miles/kWh Carwings (I WISH!)
f. $5.84
g. 1.6 cents/mile
My numbers for OCT-2011:
a. 365 miles
b. 64.93 kWh Wall (Blink)
c. 5.62 miles/kWh Wall(Blink)
e. 7.1 miles/kWh Carwings (I WISH!)
f. $5.84
g. 1.6 cents/mile
LEAFfan
Well-known member
TNleaf said:
Anyone with their m/kW h higher than ten are cheaters. If you look at the world rankings, the top ten are usually Japanese drivers and it's legit. Remember though, after the new CarWings update, it will be close to your dash or console figure. So if you see someone with 11 or higher, chances are they either put their car on a dynamo and spun the wheels in 'N' or they go down large hills in 'N' and then turn off their CarWings until they hit another hill. There could be other ways to cheat, but it means nothing when you see someone have that high a number...I've seen as high as 60m/kW H on there.
JPWhite
Well-known member
LEAFfan said:
Wouldn't they be better off with the car in eco doing down a hill? It would add energy to the battery.
TonyWilliams
Well-known member
JPWhite said:
What's the goal? The highest Car Wings data, or otherwise?
LEAFfan
Well-known member
JPWhite said:
No, 'N' is much better. I get better m/kW h coasting in neutral instead of ECO. Keep in mind when you use Tony's great chart that it is in 'D' and no hypermiling like coasting in 'N' and using ECO. I will give you an example how you can 'stretch' Tony's miles by 5-10 and still be at speed.
Today, when I left home for the QC station, I had 21% SOC, 13 miles on the GOM, one bar. Three miles later (at 40mph), I hit LBW with 11 miles on the GOM, and 17% SOC. I drove the rest of the way (12 miles) at 40mph, and had 5 miles on the GOM when I arrived, 9% SOC and 6.5m/kW h! According to the chart, if you drive 40mph you should get 5.9. The only difference was that I used ECO, timed the lights and used 'N' a quarter mile or so before the light. Before I entered the station, I drove another 1.5 miles on the adjacent streets accelerating at every chance to get it to VLBW. So I pulled into the QC station with --- and 8% SOC.
Yesterday, I disproved another notion: Driving at 60mph on the freeway in D will get you the same m/kW h as in ECO. This I proved to be false. If you look at the chart, driving 60mph will get you 3.9, but I hit 4.3 (20 mile trip) using ECO and Cruise. ECO definitely will give you more miles driving on the freeway. I had two bars when I left (can't remember the SOC or when it went to two, but only used ONE bar for almost all of the return trip (at 60mph). I hit LBW with 11 miles on the GOM/17% SOC, 4.3 on the dash, about 4 miles from home. So for those drivers that want to stretch your miles, especially after LBW, you can do it with ECO, Cruise, and 'N'.
shay
Well-known member
I think LEAFfan should teach a class o how to maximize range in your Leaf.LEAFfan said:
TonyWilliams
Well-known member
LEAFfan said:
How is that possible within the laws of physics? What is "cruise"? D mode? Is the climate control off? Were you coasting in neutral for any of this? How far did you drive? Did you start and stop at the same elevation? Was there any wind?
Can you now drive on exactly the same route in the same conditions in Drive and get 3.9? Or something else?
Sorry, it just does not make sense to me. I see that you begun your post with hypermiling techniques, which OF COURSE, you can beat that data. But then, you're not meeting the specification that generated the data.
All the techniques, yes, I use N mode a lot !!!
DaveinOlyWA
Well-known member
The drive versus eco on the freeway is a great question.
but an experiment that must be repeated several times. single results really mean nothing. this also implies if there's other things being altered in the different drive mods we are not aware of
but an experiment that must be repeated several times. single results really mean nothing. this also implies if there's other things being altered in the different drive mods we are not aware of
TonyWilliams
Well-known member
DaveinOlyWA said:
Physics is physics. It takes so much power to move that machine is the set parameters. So, any benefit ECO mode is getting is stripping something "extra", like the climate control. Great, it's eliminated from the formula.
What else? If it's just a hypermile technique, hey, that's awesome. But it's not a LEAF plowing done the road on cruise control at 60mph, which is the premise for the data. Yes, it can be beat, but to my mind, not in the identical parameters.
Not to discourage use of ECO mode (it's my driving mode of choice), but your conclusion is totally bogus. You can't simply compare your results to the chart - it's like comparing apples and oranges.LEAFfan said:
If you really want to test ECO vs D, go find a quiet stretch of road at least a couple miles long, then follow this procedure:
1. Accelerate up to 60 mph
2. Reset mi/kWh chart at set starting point
3. Drive X miles
4. Note mi/kWh reading
I would recommend doing this at least 2 times in each mode (4 times total) alternating between ECO/D each time. The more iterations you can perform, the more confidence you will have in your results.
Similar threads
