DougWantsALeaf
Well-known member
Ok, will wait for the update, but if you can even get .1 miles/kWh gain, it's certainly worth the change.
One data point does an anecdote makeknightmb said:25.1 miles 3.6 miles/kWh
25.1 miles 3.9 miles/kWh <- Gear Oil Change
SageBrush said:One data point does an anecdote makeknightmb said:25.1 miles 3.6 miles/kWh
25.1 miles 3.9 miles/kWh <- Gear Oil Change
Your result is unlikely to pass the sniff test. It implies that one well lubricated gear with older oil is generating about 30 watts more than with new oil. I'll believe a 1% difference, so about 3-4 watts.
knightmb said:Just some recent numbers, sorry about the rough format, trying to copy/paste from the Nissan website and put into a spreadsheet isn't that easy and then trying to paste it here in a readable format without requiring an external link. The lbs are CO2, just was easier to leave it in than trying to edit it all out. :mrgreen:
April 2021 (basically, the same driving route during the month, weather has been fairly consistent here, no AC/Heat needed)
These below never have any speeds greater than 55 MPH, but is the same distance driving to and from the same start and end place, even the times are consistent day to day.
Route 1
7.5 miles 4.7 miles/kWh 4 lbs
7.5 miles 4.7 miles/kWh 4 lbs
7.5 miles 4.7 miles/kWh 4 lbs
7.5 miles 5.1 miles/kWh 4 lbs <- Gear Oil Change
Route 2
6.6 miles 4.4 miles/kWh 4 lbs
6.6 miles 4.4 miles/kWh 4 lbs
6.6 miles 5.0 miles/kWh 4 lbs <- Gear Oil Change -- What?!?
Route 3
5.3 miles 5.1 miles/kWh 4 lbs
5.3 miles 5.1 miles/kWh 4 lbs
5.3 miles 5.5 miles/kWh 4 lbs <- Gear Oil Change
Route 4
4.6 miles 3.9 miles/kWh 2 lbs
4.6 miles 3.9 miles/kWh 2 lbs
4.6 miles 3.9 miles/kWh 2 lbs
4.6 miles 4.3 miles/kWh 2 lbs <- Gear Oil Change
4.6 miles 4.3 miles/kWh 2 lbs <- Gear Oil Change
4.6 miles 4.3 miles/kWh 2 lbs <- Gear Oil Change
Route 5
3.7 miles 4.1 miles/kWh 2 lbs
3.7 miles 4.1 miles/kWh 2 lbs
3.7 miles 4.1 miles/kWh 2 lbs
3.7 miles 4.1 miles/kWh 2 lbs
3.7 miles 5.0 miles/kWh 2 lbs <- Gear Oil Change -- How?!?!? :lol:
SageBrush said:One data point does an anecdote makeknightmb said:25.1 miles 3.6 miles/kWh
25.1 miles 3.9 miles/kWh <- Gear Oil Change
Your result is unlikely to pass the sniff test. It implies that one well lubricated gear with older oil is generating about 30 watts more than with new oil. I'll believe a 1% difference, so about 3-4 watts.
voltamps said:I agree with your 1% guess in our Leaf gears. .... For comparison---> In ICE cars, the difference between using a 5w-30 oil vs. a thinner 0w-20 in the engine is around a 1.5% fuel efficiency difference. .. ( This has long been studied, lots of data on 5w-30 vs. 0w-20 in car engines, and the range of difference varies depending on the application, expected 0.5% to 3% is a normal range of energy efficiency gains going to thinner stuff.)
However, knightmb has been getting repeated results, not just one or two times over the same routes, but several so far (more to come).
From the last recent thread on this subject, repeated here to show the last result wasn't just a flash in the pan:
Yep, although those gear sets are a much more complicated and compounded animal than the simple LEAF reduction gear.voltamps said:I agree with your 1% guess in our Leaf gears. .... For comparison---> In ICE cars, the difference between using a 5w-30 oil vs. a thinner 0w-20 in the engine is around a 1.5% fuel efficiency difference.
Not that Castrol fluid. It's too thick. It won't hurt your gearbox, but range will go down some. Runs a tad hotter with all that extra viscous drag. Not destructively, certainly OK for wear, but not what Nissan engineers have recommended.SageBrush said:Oddly enough, I think I'll replace my ATF today if the weather is nice. But not for efficiency, but because the LEAF is at 40k miles and I don't even want to think about future gearbox wear. I hope this is the last oil change I ever do. I plan to buy a Castrol product named Castrol Transmax Import Multi-vehicle instead of the 3x priced Nissan Matic-S. ATF nerds say it is the same stuff and I think it is available at my local Walmart.
That's the problem, we don't know what the variable heat flux (heat transfer) is through the aluminum housing is to say where the temperature would end up at. Energy (kWH) usage per mile kind of gets right to the point already.SageBrush said:I don't know how much oil heat is dissipated
voltamps said:...
If you can, please take a pic of the magnets. The 'gold standard' picture so far is estomax's Redline D6 magnets with barely any metal on them, if you don't count the other example from a Driving School where they babied the accelerator pedal & got very little metal too with the original Matic S factory fill. My magnets at only 1,400 miles on new-ish Leaf showed some metals, due to break-in polishing & my lead foot.
Good ATF there for a Leaf. I do have a slight preference for Valvoline MaxLife MultiVehicle Full Synthetic over the Castrol, since the Valvoline actually ends up being 40 cSt thinner at 32F (0C) to help range when first starting out in the winter. Either is fine. Both are in the usual Dexron VI class. Its hard to go wrong getting a name-brand DexronVI-class ATF for a Leaf.SageBrush said:@voltAmps, What is your opinion of Transmax Full Synthetic Multi-Vehicle ATF ?
Visc is proportional to friction until one goes too thin. If we keep lowering visc, at some point wear & friction start increasing rapidly. How low we can limbo is an unknown. Temperature condition are important, true there.SageBrush said:As an aside, if viscosity is proportional to friction it emphasizes the importance of standardizing initial oil temperature test conditions.
Ok, on to the next question: What are the Wh/mile consumption savings in the EPA UDDS cycle ? As in, how much savings for casual city driving where max torque is rare and a limited event ?voltamps said:Furthermore, RAVENOL ATF T-ULV Fluid reduces loss torque in the transmission by approximately 12% compared to other low viscosity ATFs."
https://www.ravenol.de/en/product-range/atf-transmission-fluids-for-automatic-transmissions-1/ravenol-atf-t-ulv-fluid/
SageBrush said:Ok, on to the next question: What are the Wh/mile consumption savings in the EPA UDDS cycle ? As in, how much savings for casual city driving where max torque is rare and a limited event ?voltamps said:Furthermore, RAVENOL ATF T-ULV Fluid reduces loss torque in the transmission by approximately 12% compared to other low viscosity ATFs."
https://www.ravenol.de/en/product-range/atf-transmission-fluids-for-automatic-transmissions-1/ravenol-atf-t-ulv-fluid/
Because as it is, 12% max savings with Ravenol on the track is somewhere in the neighborhood of 1 -- 1.5% savings overall.
SageBrush said:What are the Wh/mile consumption savings in the EPA UDDS cycle ? As in, how much savings for casual city driving where max torque is rare and a limited event ? Because as it is, 12% max savings with Ravenol on the track is somewhere in the neighborhood of 1 -- 1.5% savings overall.
Simpler, yet all the energy rate, power ( = torque x rpm), has to turn the gears in a bath of goopy goo.denwood said:The LEAF final drive physics model at play here is vastly simpler.
That is an interesting picture you conjure up, but I wonder how much of the oil motion is conserved.voltamps said:Simpler, yet all the energy rate, power ( = torque x rpm), has to turn the gears in a bath of goopy goo.denwood said:The LEAF final drive physics model at play here is vastly simpler.
Enter your email address to join: