opossum
Posts: 153
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 9:40 pm
Delivery Date: 21 Mar 2011
Leaf Number: 500
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Re: Early Capacity Losses-Was(Lost a bar...down to 11)

Tue Aug 07, 2012 12:22 pm

shrink wrote:Did you guys received a work order listing exactly what was done to your car? That seems to be standard practice whenever work is performed. I know this case is different, but you have a right to know what they did to the car you own.

Maybe you'll get one in 2-3 weeks when findings are published, but I suggest requesting one for your documentation and records.
We got a relatively useless invoice stating that we didn't owe any money. There was only one line regarding work performed. It was in the paperwork we received before our car went to Casa Grande, and it's probably a generic line item that doesn't actually mean the traction battery was replaced.

OP CODE 55NIZEBAT
NISSAN EXPRESS SERVICE BATTERY REPLACEMENT

Scott's car hadn't reached his dealership as of this morning. They told him he can pick it up anytime tomorrow.
azdre/opossum, Phoenix, 3/21/11 purchase, 10/2/12 lemon law return.
23k miles, 3 bars lost, officially rated "normal" by Nissan

User avatar
Gonewild
Posts: 1262
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 5:05 pm
Delivery Date: 18 May 2011
Leaf Number: 229
Location: Chandler, AZ

Re: Early Capacity Losses-Was(Lost a bar...down to 11)

Tue Aug 07, 2012 12:26 pm

OK your bars are back but can you drive as far as you did a few month ago?

My guess NO they just reset the counter
Last edited by Gonewild on Tue Aug 07, 2012 12:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Over 25,300 miles Plus - Now Sold/ Lease given back to Nissan 8-25-2012
Ordered Glacier Pearl Nissan Leaf SL eTech Edition on 8/31, Delivered March 1, 2011
POWERED By SunPower 5.16kw PV Solar home 3 Solar water panels.
Reserved 4/20

edatoakrun
Posts: 5222
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:33 am
Delivery Date: 15 May 2011
Leaf Number: 2184
Location: Shasta County, North California

Re: Early Capacity Losses-Was(Lost a bar...down to 11)

Tue Aug 07, 2012 12:27 pm

TickTock wrote:Just got my car back too. Was told my capacity was read to be 87% which is also 10% higher then my own repeatable and cross-checked measurements. Only rational explanation I can come up with is they keep seasonal variation separate and are able to distinguish that from permanent degradation. Maybe they cold soaked the battery and ran the test - we'll find out in a few months, I guess.

My capacity bars, also, were reset so I am now showing 12 bars capacity again.
Indicating, perhaps, that a larger part of your LEAF's reduced capacity was due to seasonal variations (rather than permanent degradation) than for those LEAFs that come back with the same number of capacity bars?

Please update your spreadsheet, and add the after-the-check figures also, as soon as you get some.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc ... li=1#gid=3" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
no condition is permanent

User avatar
OrientExpress
Posts: 1579
Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2010 12:22 pm
Delivery Date: 10 May 2011
Leaf Number: 2331
Location: San Jose, Ca

Re: Early Capacity Losses-Was(Lost a bar...down to 11)

Tue Aug 07, 2012 12:32 pm

Only rational explanation I can come up with is they keep seasonal variation separate and are able to distinguish that from permanent degradation.
Do you mean to say that in the winter time, you would gain back your lost bars?
2018 LEAF SL
Gun Metalic
Delivery April 10 2018

Prior LEAF:
2014 LEAF SV
Ocean Blue
Delivery May 23 2014
50,000+ miles - all 12 bars - Same range as new - No warranty issues ever!

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

Re: Early Capacity Losses-Was(Lost a bar...down to 11)

Tue Aug 07, 2012 12:35 pm

opossum wrote:We got a relatively useless invoice stating that we didn't owe any money. There was only one line regarding work performed. It was in the paperwork we received before our car went to Casa Grande, and it's probably a generic line item that doesn't actually mean the traction battery was replaced.

OP CODE 55NIZEBAT
NISSAN EXPRESS SERVICE BATTERY REPLACEMENT]
If I understood it correctly, then this would be similar to the protocol BMW followed with my ActiveE. I would get an invoice with zero balance, which would detail the work performed at the dealership only. If the vehicle was transferred to a technical center for further investigation or parts replacement, the service advisor could sometimes, but not always, see this information in their system. It was typically not shared with the customer, and the printout did not contain any reference to it. Image

opossum
Posts: 153
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 9:40 pm
Delivery Date: 21 Mar 2011
Leaf Number: 500
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Re: Early Capacity Losses-Was(Lost a bar...down to 11)

Tue Aug 07, 2012 1:02 pm

edatoakrun wrote:The only way to I can see to reconcile your report of kWh use, 25%-30% below that usually seen on new LEAFs, and the "85% capacity remaining" report you state came from Nissan, is that your charge level was limited to a significantly lower percentage of total battery capacity, presumably by the BMS.
Agreed. I've seen one or two other possible explanations in the last few posts also. It's okay. Maybe Nissan will get a chance to explain to a lawyer why they market it as a 24 kWhr battery pack, if they permanently or seasonally limit people to perhaps 75% of it... but only after a year of ownership. Now wouldn't *that* be an interesting discovery process! :twisted:
azdre/opossum, Phoenix, 3/21/11 purchase, 10/2/12 lemon law return.
23k miles, 3 bars lost, officially rated "normal" by Nissan

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

Re: Early Capacity Losses-Was(Lost a bar...down to 11)

Tue Aug 07, 2012 1:12 pm

Gonewild wrote:OK your bars are back but can you drive as far as you did a few month ago?

My guess NO they just reset the counter

Very, very disappointing, if true. This was in my "worst fear" handling of this.

User avatar
Nubo
Posts: 5778
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 11:01 am
Delivery Date: 31 Oct 2014
Location: Vallejo, CA

Re: Early Capacity Losses-Was(Lost a bar...down to 11)

Tue Aug 07, 2012 1:13 pm

Pipcecil wrote:...
In fact, thinking over it, I bet Nissan is going to pull something close to this out of their hat...i.e. "we never said 70% usable capacity, we said 70% capacity" so their fudge of that ~3 kWh in the battery will play back into their favor. Even if they do the math right, that still may save them against more cars (like mine) to figure a "fix". In addition, because we can't access the entire pack, they can easily pull a "our method is the only way to determine because we can access the full pack, blah blah."
I seriously hope that someone in charge at Nissan recognizes the dangers inherent in any kind of Fudging, or Ostrich-ing at this juncture. The speed at which this came up is alarming and it doesn't seem like something they could skate around unless they believe in the Mayan Calendar. Or they don't realize the precision to which LEAF customers are going to be able to understand their battery condition with tools such as LEAFSCAN, etc...

This is a critical point of the game. The correct answer includes a battery capacity warranty -- at a minimum, and hopefully some improvements. The wrong answers include:

obfuscation
pretending
nerfing the vehicle
reassurances without precise terms in writing

The early adopters are ambassadors. My word-of-mouth can sell cars or it can prevent sales. Right now I love the car but when I explain it to folks I am compelled to mention the current unresolved battery degradation issue. I take pains to be objective about it, but a shadow crosses their face at that point.
I noticed you're still working with polymers.

vegastar
Posts: 208
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 11:29 am
Delivery Date: 07 Jul 2011
Leaf Number: 5564
Location: Portugal

Re: Early Capacity Losses-Was(Lost a bar...down to 11)

Tue Aug 07, 2012 1:26 pm

Tick Tock:

Did you make a gid reading at 100%?
2011 Nissan LEAF since 2011-07-07, 151000 km on 2018-03-03, 7 bars, 37.9Ah.

edatoakrun
Posts: 5222
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:33 am
Delivery Date: 15 May 2011
Leaf Number: 2184
Location: Shasta County, North California

Re: Early Capacity Losses-Was(Lost a bar...down to 11)

Tue Aug 07, 2012 1:30 pm

opossum wrote:
edatoakrun wrote:The only way to I can see to reconcile your report of kWh use, 25%-30% below that usually seen on new LEAFs, and the "85% capacity remaining" report you state came from Nissan, is that your charge level was limited to a significantly lower percentage of total battery capacity, presumably by the BMS.
Agreed. I've seen one or two other possible explanations in the last few posts also. It's okay. Maybe Nissan will get a chance to explain to a lawyer why they market it as a 24 kWhr battery pack, if they permanently or seasonally limit people to perhaps 75% of it... but only after a year of ownership. Now wouldn't *that* be an interesting discovery process! :twisted:
Actually, as I and other have been posting here for the last three months or so, it looks like there may have been the same temporary charge limitation last year. TickTock was among the few who noticed it, and recorded the subsequent increase last Winter, and the decline again this spring and summer.


https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc ... li=1#gid=3" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Presumably the only loss of capacity sufficient for bar loss last year, was by the one LEAF who's driver chose not to report it.

The reason so many bar losses are showing up this year, is probably due, in part or all, to the many factors you would expect to lead to temporary and/or permanent decreases in capacity, battery temperature history, time, charge cycles, and battery care practices by drivers, adding up over time.
no condition is permanent

Return to “Problems / Troubleshooting”