Page 279 of 801

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

Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 9:12 am
by edatoakrun
Stoaty wrote:
edatoakrun wrote:I don't understand why you have come to that conclusion, since one axis itself is months since delivery.

I wanted to see what might account for the anomalous 24,000 mile one bar loss report, and only then realized it must be the 10 month/20,000 mile report on the Wiki, right?
Right. To be honest, I don't know which is the correct comparison:

One compares the total miles driven to the time it takes to lose a bar - no correlation
The other compares the rate at which miles are accumulated to the time it takes to lose a bar - moderate correlation

The more I think about it, the more confused I have become. I welcome input from others more knowlegeable than I. :oops:
Where are the "no correlation" results graphed, for the same group of bar loss reports?

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

Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 9:17 am
by RegGuheert
TonyWilliams wrote:I'm not sure what you are actually saying, or trying to prove.
He's answering someone who questioned his statement that his treadmill test would consume 80% of the power that it does when driving. I also questioned that, guesstimating it would be less than 50% of normal driving power.

The problem is that his treadmill does not allow him to dial in any amount of loss and therefore match the 15KW that is seen during normal driving, so there is some concern that it may take several hours to drain the battery. We'll see when he does the test.

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

Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 9:21 am
by TonyWilliams
sub3marathonman wrote:It is possible that Orient Express is right, since so far there is only anecdotal evidence, not proof. We need a valid representative sample of all Leafs, not just ones with capacity bar losses. So far, I don't know if it is 90% of the Leafs in Phoenix losing capacity, or only 9%. I don't know how that percentage corresponds to the people in Seattle. I don't know if this data has been compiled either, since the focus is ONLY on Leafs with capacity bar losses.

What is more important than mileage, which has shown a low correlation to capacity loss, is the temperature history of each battery, but I don't know if the car tracks that data.
"Maybe it is right" sounds like the way every religion was ever sold to me. Sure, maybe.

To determine if OrientExpress is right or wrong, you would first have to specify which of his many statements is perhaps right.

1. "So far, all of the posts on this subject are speculation, hearsay, innuendo, and opinion."

2. "In reading through all the cases, I really don't see a problem"

3. "I have to believe that if there was an issue, it would have been detected and solved by now"

4. This is just a problem with "several vocal individuals."

5. There is so much confidence, he agreed to swap his battery!!! >>> "sure, come on by, and we will put the cars up on blocks and switch them out." :)

6. There are as many cars with reduced capacity as there are with ">>excess<< capacity and they are both edge cases". I sure as heck haven't seen a mention of that excess case(s) !!!!

7. "If there is an actual issue with a customer's battery, then it will be a simple routine warranty repair."

8. This is just "battery FUD that is concentrated in some posts... Kuddos to Nissan for a job well done."

9. Hey, it's only "17 cars out of a population of 25000 is .00068.... or in layman's terms, an edge case."

10. "for the 0.00074074074074 of LEAF owners..... investigate the myriad of options other than complaining to get satisfaction for your transportation needs."

11. Still no problem; just charge more!!! "'the only complaint being that they have to be "filled-up" more often"

12. "Of the fewer than 10 posters that make up the the vast majority of the posts in the 148+ pages of this thread, I'm probably the most rationale one of the bunch."

13. It's a little battery problem because "in the larger scheme of things this is just a fart in the breeze."

14. "8 or so posters that have been the key proponents of this... with some interpretative data that they have been able to glean from some homebrew devices". Hey, Phil, when will you have my homebrew device ready?

15. And then the insults got more pronounced... "Nothing smells right when you don't have a sense of smell". And then there's: "
One of the sure signs of dementia is paranoia and being convinced that everything smells bad."

16. All of the previous statements are because "I have a deeper understanding of how failure analysis in the automotive industry works."

17. So, it might be a software problem... "What if this whole thing is just a SW bug that is not accurately reporting the capacity of the battery?" A bit later, that was upgraded to, "reputable highly-placed sources suggest that a software bug". Naturally, no data to support this, or any other claim.

18. Some very specific and detailed data from most detailed person on the forum is juat tossed aside with... "your methodology does not support your conclusions" from somebody that really hasn't provided ANY data.

19. Another "theory" with no data to support it (nor was any offered), "only those cars that have been driven in a severe and high-mileage mode trigger the condition."

20. The best for last, as this post is an all time classic!!! "very vocal and seemingly hysterical schizophrenic ADD owners ... they don't represent the vast majority of LEAF owners.... for whatever reason are unable to deal with the situation and would rather freak out. Speculation is rampant, and facts are few... fan the flames of discontent in a very trollish manner... for many that is not good enough and demand immediate satisfaction... Other than assigning wet nurses to the most vocal and impatient of those that are dissatisfied, it is hard to say what more than can be done."

My observation is that whatever OE suggests is without serious scrutiny of all the data that suggests heat on the cells that have no protection from heat is the problem (unlike Tesla and Volt, both of which have a Temperature Management System, and with no "Phoenix" problem).

Long before OE owned, or reserved a LEAF, an article titled "Is the Nissan LEAF Battery Pack under Engineered?" suggested that there were serious shortcomings with Nissan's non-temperature protected battery. The comments that were made to this article from 2009 (many that appear to be from "the industry" of people in the know) almost one year before a single LEAF was produced, also suggest Nissan made a serious mistake selling the car in hot environments like Phoenix and Texas. They used those words.

Tesla CEO Elon Musk, also in 2009, well before LEAF was released for sale "ripped" on Nissan's battery technology, and said it's "primitive" without a temperature management system. PLease read the comments on this article, also. Very well thought predictions that this would not end well for Nissan and (my biggest fear) the greater electric vehicle community.

Naturally, the Nissan legal department made clear that the battery capacity is without warrantee, but as we know, consumers have been sold a car in hot places like Phoenix that the manufacturer knew would NOT survive the heat and did NOT tell the consumer of these shortcomings.

Anybody who suggests the "non-problem" is anything EXCEPT a heat related issue to a poorly designed product is strictly a denier in my mind; not much different than climate change deniers. If anybody wants the BEST look into the future of Mark Perry, and Nissan's "answer" to this, carefully follow OE's posts.

The reason Seattle, San Francisco, and San Diego LEAF's do so well, in comparison to Phoenix and Texas, is heat.

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

Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 9:36 am
by johndoe74
3 weeks to my wife's Leaf one year of ownership, we were 'rewarded' with a 2nd capacity bar loss.

First bar loss reported back in June @ 13500 miles.

The 2nd bar loss happened on Aug 16 @ 16890 miles.

I noticed other Phoenicians also lost their 2nd bar, after about 3000 miles or two months after the first bar loss.

For the last 4 weeks, we shifted charging from 9PM at night to 3AM in the morning, but I guess that doesn't really matter as at 3AM, our garage is still in the mid to high 90s. We still only charge to 80% all the time (at most two or three 100% charge in the last 2 months). This morning we charge it to 100%, and the available range shown is 67 miles.

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

Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 9:41 am
by KJD
johndoe74 wrote:3 weeks to my wife's Leaf one year of ownership, we were 'rewarded' with a 2nd capacity bar loss..
To report battery capacity loss to Nissan: 877-NO-GAS-EV (1-877-664-2738).

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

Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 9:43 am
by TonyWilliams
johndoe74 wrote:3 weeks to my wife's Leaf one year of ownership, we were 'rewarded' with a 2nd capacity bar loss.
It just makes me sick to keep hearing these reports. Sorry for your loss(es), and I hope it doesn't make your daily use too difficult now. Best wishes with both your interactions with Nissan, and the final disposition of this issue.

I hope nobody goes "postal" when they stroll into a dealership with 3, 4, or more capacity bars missing, only to be met with an "all is normal".

If you don't know, it's an ABSOLUTE WASTE OF YOUR TIME to go to the dealer. They have nothing they can or will do, except give you "5 stars".

Here is my summary of the issues to date: ... 20#p220120" onclick=";return false;

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

Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 9:54 am
by myleaf
My 100% charge now yields 211 Gids. I have not lost the second bar yet. Some limited capacity history is in my signature.

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

Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 10:09 am
by opossum
Great post, Tony!


Update to the "11 people I know" sample (I remembered another guy who bought a Leaf and asked him if he had lost any capacity)...

1. 3 bars (dh)
2. 3 bars (rr)
3. 2 bars (mc)
4.   2 bars (mm)
5. 1 bar (tc)
6. 1 bar (rs)
7. 1 bar (pg)
8. 1 bar (cs)
9.    1 bar (sn)
10. on the cusp of losing 1 bar (js)
11. No known capacity loss. 80% charges, owned 1 year, only 5000 miles driven (em)


82% already lost 1 to 3 bars
9% just about lost 1 bar
9% no known loss w/ 80% charges in 1 year and 5,000 miles

Background: There are 11 people (including my wife) I knew before they purchased Leafs (or met immediately after they purchased their Leafs). I did not meet any of these people *because* they began complaining of capacity/range issues. I simply met them before or immediately after they purchased Leafs. And now, let's check in on those 11 cars (all here in Phoenix) and see whether they have lost any capacity...

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

Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 10:25 am
by Stoaty
johndoe74 wrote:3 weeks to my wife's Leaf one year of ownership, we were 'rewarded' with a 2nd capacity bar loss.
Added to Wiki. We don't have a case number for your report to Nissan or the date of the report. Other info missing from the Wiki is the date of manufacture (month & year), which I believe is on the frame where drivers door closes.

Latest stats:

The geographic breakdown of these cases is: Arizona - 36, Texas - 13, California - 6. The breakdown by number of capacity bars lost is: one bar - 29, two bars - 22, three bars - 4.

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

Posted: Fri Aug 17, 2012 10:26 am
by dsh
Avondale Nissan checked out LEAF today. As assumed, “Battery tested good at this time, but is not an indication of future failure.” All computer diagnostics checked out OK. Was informed there’s no ‘cooling fan’ for the batteries, but I do have the battery heater in this vehicle.
Received update on Casa Grande testing…Nissan looking at specific cells measuring highest charge cells vs. lowest charge cells to determine reason for variation. Also, they ARE able to replace out individual modules. In addition, Nissan was able to say LEAFs have approximately 5% more capacity, than what is listed via Li-ion battery capacity level gauge… Good to know.
They did state this is one of the lowest mileage LEAFs they encountered with the battery degradation problem…other owners had at least 20-30k on their vehicles.
Nissan will keep me posted with their conclusions, but nothing as of yet…as expected.
Lastly, received contact back from Executive Relations spokesman for Mark Perry and he said as assumed, no information yet, but Nissan diligently testing. I suggested Nissan offer good faith replacements for these batteries and when /if they have updated versions in 2013 to replace again. Some owners use this vehicle for work, and if they can’t get the range need, it will impact them negatively.
Will keep forum posted…