klapauzius wrote:Also note that the capacity bars (like many other things in the LEAFs displays) are apparently NOT linear, so the first bar is NOT 8.3% but 15%. I think this non-linearity (also for the temperature) is a BIG mistake on Nissans side, since people generally cannot cope with non-linearity well (unless its asymptotic).
Yes, I have heard that, but please note: if the first bars are not proportional, but represent even higher percentages at the upper levels, then the differences between what the lost bars were predicting and what the actual range was in the test are even greater
For example, if White626's 11 bars indicated 85% (instead of 92.7%), then the capacity range would predict only 64.6 miles (instead of 69.7 miles), i.e.
, 8.9 miles lower
(instead of 3.8 lower) than the actual 73.5 miles it achieved in the test.
I have finally read your treatise, Mark, it was a bit tough getting through the first portion. It was little too much pontificating for my taste. That said let me sum up what you did:
- take the lowest estimate from NTB11-076a as range expectation for a new Leaf
- assume linear battery capacity degradation dependent on mileage only
- assume linear distribution of battery capacity bars
Let's assume for the moment that the average range in the Phoenix fleet (2011 vehicles only) is down 15%. This is roughly in line with the results Nissan verbally communicated to some owners that had their Leafs examined in Casa Grande. Let's also assume that the usable battery capacity in a new Leaf was in fact 21 kWh, which should be verifiable.
If this was the case, you are virtually erasing 10% from 15% average degradation in the Phoenix fleet by assuming 76 miles of range in a new vehicle. You then proceed to formulate a degradation model based on cycling losses only to fit this artificiality low estimate, and then proclaim that everything is fine. Well done. Did I miss anything?
If you wanted to risk a look at a better effort at analyzing the results, here is a graph from a recent article
on thetruthaboutcars.com. This is similar to a plot Stoaty did earlier
. Note that the car at 95% and 16,000 miles had in reality a shorter range. Tony misread the results sheet, and it should be at about 90% (Blue534).
LEAFfan wrote:It's really simple. If you have full battery capacity (new pack), that's around 21 kW h usable. If you show and keep 4.0m/kW h on your dash (like during the test) , you will be able to drive at least 84 miles. Anyone that doesn't realize this is just ignoring the facts.
Indeed. The pattern I'm seeing here are a few EV enthusiasts pitting themselves against affected owners thinking that they don't get it. While I applaud what these folks have done for EVs, nothing could be farther from the truth. This is the wrong fight.