Taking my leaf in for Cell Voltage Loss Inspection

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

JeremyW

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2011
Messages
1,575
Location
San Gabriel, CA
I have noticed in the past cell pair #57 has deviated when getting down below low battery warning. Soon it was "around" low battery warning. Then ~70 gids. Now, around 100 gids it starts deviating. It's obvious to me that I have a cell pair that is aging prematurely. Last night after going to 17 gids and checking leafspy, I know something is seriously wrong. Yes, I had/have regular capacity degradation but lately I wouldn't feel confident taking more than a 30-40 mile round trip with the car. My use for the leaf is very local, about 12 mile commute and 14 miles round trip to the girlfriend's house. But even with those very modest requirements I'm starting to really feel the pinch.

2PnVJ6Wl.png


The car goes to Glendale Nissan this afternoon, hopefully. This will be the thread where I document the progress. Due to the pack's age I don't think Nissan will be able to get away with replacing just the module, but we will see....
 
If there's a chance that you might qualify for a new pack under the battery warranty (the loss of 3 bars within so many years or whatever it is), consider that if you get this cell's module replaced, it may increase your capacity such that you would no longer qualify for that warranty replacement within the time limits of the warranty. Then you will find yourself wondering whether you would have rather replaced one cell module or the entire pack.
 
Two things:

1. I do not qualify for the capacity warranty because I opted out of the lawsuit. Further, this is a lease that will not qualify for 4 bar loss before September 2015 when the lease is up.

2. My range loss is significant and I need every damn watt-hour since I currently only charge in public.
 
Good luck!

FWIW, I estimate that an average cell voltage of 3.74 should give you a SOC around 20% and an average cell voltage of 3.59 should give you a SOC around 10% based on some voltage logging / plotting I did a while back.
 
Dropped the car off, I gave them the two pages from the service manual and a screenshot of leafspy. Got a Altima for two days (after that I'll be driving my insight till the car's fixed), and thankfully my carwings says they didn't try to charge it (I brought it in just over LBW, it's now somewhere between LBW and VLBW).

So a thumbs up to Glendale Nissan, so far. :)

Oh and this morning I noticed that the deviation started at 120 gids (~30mv difference between average and cell pair #57). :shock:
 
Update: Nissan told me to pound sand.

Got a call from Glendale Nissan who said the car passed the CVLI test and that the tech line told them this was simply normal battery degradation.

It is not. The degradation was sudden over the last month. It is obvious that I have a cell that is weaker than the rest of the pack. Further, it looks pretty obvious that the car should fail this test.

I will continue to drive the car normally, documenting how fast this cell ages. I give it about a month before it throws code P33E6, which is for cell imbalance.

I will also begin to communicate with higher ups in Nissan.
 
Given the lack of luck people have had Nissan dealers running the CVLI test and failing it, I can't say I'm surprised.

It seems like if you don't trigger an error code, you have very little luck in getting Nissan to acknowledge an issue.

Oh well. It doesn't look like you have long to wait if it's gotten this bad in a month.

How well is the pack balanced at 80% and 100%?
 
The service manual says they can use a bad cell voltage as high as 3.712 volts for the test.
It appears from my reading that at the higher voltages the bad cell difference is less. I noticed
the picture showed the bad cell at a lower voltage. I wonder what the numbers would be if
lowest cell is at 3.712 volts?
 
JeremyW said:
I will also begin to communicate with higher ups in Nissan.
Thanks for being the "guinea pig" in attempting to get Nissan to take action on this issue. I'm sorry about how poorly it has gone so far. :cry: Can you please provide an update? I am interested to hear how this is playing out as I hope to make a claim against CVLI problems in the future. I have one cell-pair (37) that is degrading faster than the rest, but it does not fail CVLI unless it is well below 3.712V.
cliff said:
The service manual says they can use a bad cell voltage as high as 3.712 volts for the test.
It appears from my reading that at the higher voltages the bad cell difference is less. I noticed the picture showed the bad cell at a lower voltage. I wonder what the numbers would be if lowest cell is at 3.712 volts?
I agree that it is best to look at CVLI right after the lowest cell crosses below 3.712V. That result would be interesting.

At the same time, I'm willing to bet that the service technician looked at CVLI at much higher voltages, and that is the reason for the pass. I wonder if the Consult III equipment enforces that the test is done correctly or if there is any other way to ensure that these technicians are doing it correctly. I guess if/when I take mine in, I will attempt to insist on seeing a printout from the test showing the voltages.
 
Not much to report. I haven't really pursued talking to anyone else at Nissan yet. While the cell is still degrading, I've calculated the miles left on my lease and the reality is that I shouldn't be driving the car much more than just commuting. To add a bit of salt to the wound, I just got a call today from my original dealer asking when I could bring it in for an oil change. :|

Overall, I just want to remove my charger and push this thing over a bridge. Luckily in less than a year I'll be able to walk away from it at least. This car could have aged well. But not in Nissan's hands. Not with the "just lease a new one" mentality.
 
Back
Top