User avatar
TonyWilliams
Posts: 10091
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2011 1:48 am
Location: San Diego
Contact: Website

Re: Battery Aging Model

Fri Dec 28, 2012 12:49 pm

ronwright38 wrote:I have 14,000 Miles and I lost one Bar and the miles when charged is any way from 88 mile to 95 mile and when I drive for 5 or 6 miles it drops to 80 , then after 25 miles it drops to 55 miles and some time i just make back home to charge it . what can be done to get the battery pack fixed as when I picked up the car it was in the showroom for 6 months as a demo and think that's why the batteries did not hold the charge and i live in Arizona . ;)
First, we don't care what range is displayed in the dash. Unfortunately, it is grossly inaccurate.

Second, losing one capacity bar is 15% loss in capapcity. The official battery capacity value, per the Nissan service manual for LEAF is as follows. It's important to note that Nissan removed all reference to this data in the April 2011 update of the service manual.

12 of 12 bars - 100% to 85%
11 of 12 bars - 84.99% to 78.75%
10 of 12 bars - 78.74% to 72.50%
9 of 12 bars - 72.49% to 66.25%
8 of 12 bars - 60% to 66.24%

Third, the new warranty will only apply if you have lost 4 bars (leaving 8 illuminated). You have a long way to go.

In other words, everything is Nissan Normal(TM).

User avatar
surfingslovak
Vendor
Posts: 3809
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 1:35 pm

Re: Battery Aging Model

Tue Jan 01, 2013 5:14 pm

In the light of the recent announcement, I had a closer look at the current version of the battery aging model on the Wiki over the holidays. Given the fact that Nissan has decided to warranty 70% of original capacity for 5 years and 60K miles, I found it nothing short of surprising that the table Stoaty has compiled predicted this type of outcome several months ago. It's also an interesting coincidence that Stoaty selected the same EOL criteria (70%), and the same average annual mileage (12.5K). Although the model is an approximation, and a synthesis of several best guesses, the number of years needed to reach EOL seems to match the proposed warranty length very well. Kudos, I'm impressed!

ImageImage
Click to open

Stoaty
Posts: 4490
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 9:50 pm
Delivery Date: 12 Jun 2011
Leaf Number: 3871
Location: West Los Angeles

Re: Battery Aging Model

Tue Jan 01, 2013 5:26 pm

surfingslovak wrote:In the light of the recent announcement, I had a closer look at the current version of the battery aging model on the Wiki over the holidays. Given the fact that Nissan has decided to warranty 70% of original capacity for 5 years and 60K miles, I found it nothing short of surprising that the table Stoaty has compiled on the Wiki several months ago predicts this type of outcome. It's also an interesting coincidence that Stoaty selected the same EOL criteria (70%), and the same average annual mileage (12.5K). Although the model is an approximation, and a synthesis of several best guesses, the number of years needed to reach EOL seems to match the proposed warranty length. Kudos, I'm impressed!
Do you think Nissan might have cheated and just used the Battery Aging Model to set their warranty cutoff points, or did I just luck out with my assumptions and calculations? ;)

If the model is correct, they might have to replace up to half of the battery packs in a few select (and relatively small) markets like Phoenix. Most areas of the country won't get close to to the 70%, so they will probably be pretty safe overall.
2011 Leaf with 62,000 miles given to Nephew
2013 Tesla Model S85 with 251 miles rated range at full charge
Leaf Spy Manual
Battery Aging Model Spreadsheet

User avatar
surfingslovak
Vendor
Posts: 3809
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 1:35 pm

Re: Battery Aging Model

Tue Jan 01, 2013 5:35 pm

Stoaty wrote:Do you think Nissan might have cheated and just used the Battery Aging Model to set their warranty cutoff points, or did I just luck out with my assumptions and calculations? ;)
Ha, who knows! ;-) What I do know that they read here prodigiously, which I believe is a good thing.
Stoaty wrote: If the model is correct, they might have to replace up to half of the battery packs in a few select (and relatively small) markets like Phoenix. Most areas of the country won't get close to to the 70%, so they will probably be pretty safe overall.
Well, if the model predicts the median value, then the announced warranty would indeed be not very favorable to Nissan. I have to assume that they selected the best possible warranty metrics and thresholds, while minimizing the number of expected claims. We probably agree that this should be expected from any warranty. Although, given the change of attitude, and the number of goodwill gestures, I wouldn't be surprised if they decided to pursue a more generous arrangement in this particular instance. Batteries will only get better, and there is no doubt in my mind that they are already working on the next iteration or two of their core technology. Given the number of vehicles that will be sold in markets such as Phoenix in the meantime, and the number of miles driven there on average, this could still be an economically sensible arrangement.

DaveinOlyWA
Posts: 14610
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:43 pm
Delivery Date: 16 Nov 2019
Leaf Number: 319862
Location: Olympia, WA
Contact: Website

Re: Battery Aging Model

Tue Jan 01, 2013 6:26 pm

this chart showing a significant percentage in certain areas needing warranty replacements should be more than enough evidence that Nissan has addressed this exact issue in the 2013 model resulting in the hints provided during Palmer's warranty statement.

there is no way a company could continue to put out product that is "scheduled" to fail. The retro active warranty is more a "thank you for your patience" (of which we had waaay too much) more than any admittance of wrong doing.

i still think the timing of the announcement along with the timing of the battery plant and suspected extra batteries now available all points to a major development that is American specific since there is no where in the primarily marine climate controlled Japan where heat is a major issue.
2011 SL; 44,598 mi, 87% SOH. 2013 S; 44,840 mi, 91% SOH. 2016 S30; 29,413 mi, 99% SOH. 2018 S; 25,185 mi, SOH 92.23%. 2019 S Plus; 4411.3 mi, 96.88% SOH
My Blog; http://daveinolywa.blogspot.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
surfingslovak
Vendor
Posts: 3809
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 1:35 pm

Re: Battery Aging Model

Tue Jan 01, 2013 6:55 pm

DaveinOlyWA wrote:this chart showing a significant percentage in certain areas needing warranty replacements should be more than enough evidence that Nissan has addressed this exact issue in the 2013 model resulting in the hints provided during Palmer's warranty statement.
Let me restate what I said above: the model does not predict a median outcome for a population of vehicles, it predicts individual outcomes. You would have to take a representative sample from Phoenix, apply the model to each car, come up with a projection, and see what the result is expected to be at the end of the five year period. Then you look at the distribution of these individual outcomes, and determine the median.

To be clear, I think Stoaty needs to be commended on the model, especially since there were many diverging views and opinions. While we cannot expect this approximation to be super accurate, I believe the warranty announcement and its terms indicate that this model is at least in the right ballpark. I would be more worried if it showed that a LEAF in Phoenix will be down 30% after 30K miles and 1 1/2 years, which I believe is what happened to Scott Yarosh. If this was the expected outcome, then I agree, that this warranty is not possible without some major product changes.
DaveinOlyWA wrote:there is no way a company could continue to put out product that is "scheduled" to fail. The retro active warranty is more a "thank you for your patience" (of which we had waaay too much) more than any admittance of wrong doing.
I'd curious to know what you are basing this on. Do you think that there will be a change of chemistry or a TMS in the US 2013 model?

DaveinOlyWA
Posts: 14610
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:43 pm
Delivery Date: 16 Nov 2019
Leaf Number: 319862
Location: Olympia, WA
Contact: Website

Re: Battery Aging Model

Tue Jan 01, 2013 7:05 pm

surfingslovak wrote:
DaveinOlyWA wrote:there is no way a company could continue to put out product that is "scheduled" to fail. The retro active warranty is more a "thank you for your patience" (of which we had waaay too much) more than any admittance of wrong doing.
I'd curious to know what you are basing this on. Do you think that there will be a change of chemistry or a TMS in the US 2013 model?
yes

well maybe not a TMS per se but a significant change to the BMS overall that will address the heat issue.

now its not like we were not told several months ago

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/107 ... acity-loss" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

we already know there is a configuration change in the JPN version which is a country with minimal heat issues that we have so it would make sense to apply other changes to the pack as well since there was already a redesign in place anyway.

since i still fully believe that TMS was part of the original LEAF plan that was removed due to cost, the normal development cycle for such a major change i believe to be doable within the few months they have had time to react.

now, its all speculation and i fully admit to being an optimist and nothing will ever change that and maybe i am deluding myself but as much as Nissan has been maligned here and elsewhere, i am still grateful for what they have done because its now 17 days short of two full years and there is still nothing out there that is a better fit for my transportation needs and my budget...nothing even close.

did i compromise to make it "fit better?" oh ya!! i did but its nothing more than any other thing I have done in my life since life for most of us is a series of compromises. we give a little to get a little. my compromise to make the LEAF work imm has been minimal.

Nissan still has the advantage in the EV game and I think they want to keep it
Last edited by DaveinOlyWA on Tue Jan 01, 2013 7:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
2011 SL; 44,598 mi, 87% SOH. 2013 S; 44,840 mi, 91% SOH. 2016 S30; 29,413 mi, 99% SOH. 2018 S; 25,185 mi, SOH 92.23%. 2019 S Plus; 4411.3 mi, 96.88% SOH
My Blog; http://daveinolywa.blogspot.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
surfingslovak
Vendor
Posts: 3809
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 1:35 pm

Re: Battery Aging Model

Tue Jan 01, 2013 7:09 pm

DaveinOlyWA wrote:
surfingslovak wrote: I'd curious to know what you are basing this on. Do you think that there will be a change of chemistry or a TMS in the US 2013 model?
yes

well maybe not a TMS per se but a significant change to the BMS overall that will address the heat issue.
While there is a number of things Nissan could do to improve instrumentation and other things in the car, I think it's doubtful that there is much they can do in such a short period of time.

DaveinOlyWA
Posts: 14610
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2010 7:43 pm
Delivery Date: 16 Nov 2019
Leaf Number: 319862
Location: Olympia, WA
Contact: Website

Re: Battery Aging Model

Tue Jan 01, 2013 7:18 pm

surfingslovak wrote:
DaveinOlyWA wrote:
surfingslovak wrote: I'd curious to know what you are basing this on. Do you think that there will be a change of chemistry or a TMS in the US 2013 model?
yes

well maybe not a TMS per se but a significant change to the BMS overall that will address the heat issue.
While there is a number of things Nissan could do to improve instrumentation and other things in the car, I think it's doubtful that there is much they can do in such a short period of time.
i edited my post because had to look for a link but i think it not wise to think that Nissan just started working on the problem when we brought it to their attention. despite what they have claimed, I fully believe they knew about the issues way in advance and had been working on a solution for a long time
2011 SL; 44,598 mi, 87% SOH. 2013 S; 44,840 mi, 91% SOH. 2016 S30; 29,413 mi, 99% SOH. 2018 S; 25,185 mi, SOH 92.23%. 2019 S Plus; 4411.3 mi, 96.88% SOH
My Blog; http://daveinolywa.blogspot.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
surfingslovak
Vendor
Posts: 3809
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2011 1:35 pm

Re: Battery Aging Model

Tue Jan 01, 2013 7:21 pm

DaveinOlyWA wrote:i edited my post because had to look for a link but i think it not wise to think that Nissan just started working on the problem when we brought it to their attention. despite what they have claimed, I fully believe they knew about the issues way in advance and had been working on a solution for a long time
Right, I suppose that's possible, and they have proven to be working very diligently, albeit quietly. That said, I choose not to believe in this theory. I hope you don't mind. I took enough flak for trying to raise awareness last May, and even more so in the subsequent months. Although the right hand might not know what the left hand is doing when it comes to large corporations, I have to think that there was at least one element of surprise in the mix. It might not have necessarily been battery performance though.

I had a look at the GCR article you referenced above, and I believe that Ghosn was referring to the Mk2 battery there. He specifically mentioned lower manufacturing costs, and the MK2 battery and its modified packaging would fit the bill.
Carlos Ghosn wrote:There is a second generation of battery coming (online) now...which is less costly than the previous one, we are in a race in which you reduce the costs and adapt the price.

Return to “General / Main Owners Forum”