What is Your Best Long Term Average M/KWh on Dash?

I think this is a lot more important than what you can do on one particular trip. To participate, you can reset your average and start fresh. Minimum acceptable distance 500 miles, >= 1000 miles is better.

Here is mine: 5.7 miles per KWh over lifetime of my Leaf (800 miles). Most of the mileage is from commute on L.A. freeways, with total of 1300 feet elevation gain (and loss) each day I commute.

My techniques:

1) Charge to 80% always (regen always available)
2) Always drive ECO mode
3) Try to anticipate traffic so I don't have to brake
4) Try to anticipate traffic so I don't have to use regen
5) Accelerate slowly from stop, keeping power at 5-10 KW depending on traffic
6) Drive 50-55 MPH on freeway unless traffic makes me drive slower
7) Limit power to 20 KW on uphill drives, except for one particularly steep area on freeway where I allow 30 KW (which results in about 45 MPH on this short, generally busy section of freeway)

Any takers?

We are kind of tracking this on a monthly basis here ...

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=3207

Very good info. Stoaty I wish people in ICE cars would follow that also...

evnow said:

We are kind of tracking this on a monthly basis here ...

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=3207

Click to expand...

I missed that, thanks. OK, I will turn this thread into lifetime average M/KWh on the dash.

wow 5.7 is great especially with freeway in the mix. when i drive around town, i get similar figures but when SO drives the Centralia trip (about 63 miles @90% freeway) she does the low 4's which destroys the average.

i reset the MPK figure on the dash every month and its currently at 4.6 and that is a boost from last week when she drove 2 days in a row (to test the 240 volt charging time) and it was at 4.2

DaveinOlyWA said:

but when SO drives the Centralia trip (about 63 miles @90% freeway) she does the low 4's which destroys the average.

Click to expand...

I see you are fighting a losing battle here... either give up the high mileage or give up the SO. Tough choice! :lol:

ya, well she is not a conservative driver either. she is generally running late in the mornings which means she is right about 70 mph so hypermiling is an alien concept to her especially now that she knows her work is well within the Leaf's range

We can't avoid going up and down hills everywhere we go, so our best efforts have lead to a gradual improvement from the mid 3's to 4.2 now at 3k.
G

I'm a bit disappointed, but I'm not sure whether the problem is me, my car, or its computer. Because I am retired, about 90% of my trips are very short - probably averaging under two miles each. My almost universal experience is that the m/kWh display on the dash is blank for the first quarter mile, than starts at about 2.3, gradually working it's way up. On a day when I make only short trips it is unlikely to get above 4.0, sometimes ending as low as 3.5. We do have a slight upgrade in the first block from our house, but it's only a 15 foot rise, so surely that can't be much of the reason.

When I travel 25-30 miles on a longer trip, usually at 50-60 mph, I can easily get up to 4.5. If I travel 60-80 miles in a day I'm usually around 5.0, plus or minus. My lifetime average, from the center console energy screen, drifts between 4.0 and 4.1.

So, what is my problem? I thought by going from the Prius to the LEAF that I would get away from that ICE bugaboo of poor mileage on a cold engine. Does the LEAF also have to warm up before it gets efficient? Or is there something wrong with the computer calculation, such as starting with a zero average? Could it be that I have to "warm up" my brain before I start driving efficiently? Perhaps it's the fact that on local streets near my house I'm only driving 20-25 mph, though that's only the first and last half mile, so even on short trips it's not much more than half the distance. Besides, the number starts climbing before I get to the first 35 mph street.

Whatever the reason, it doesn't seem likely I'll be winning any m/kWh contests.

Ray

Hi Ray,

I don't think it's you, I think it's just the nature of an average. When you start driving right after resetting the indicator, your miles covered is low and your power usage is relatively high because you are accelerating from a stop. After you reach your 'cruising' speed, power usage drops off and you start racking up the miles, so your average miles/kWh goes steadily up. If you only make short trips, you spend more time accelerating than cruising, compared to, say, my commute where I spend a lot more time at a constant speed giving me more time to increase my average. Even your 15 foot climb has a big effect on the average until you've covered more distance. Of course this is a very simple model that does not consider the effect of hills, regen, stop/go patterns, etc., but the effect is similar for a more complex example.

I did a simple experiment this morning to verify that it's not the gauge. When I left my house this morning, I reset the gauge and applied very little power (just a sliver on the energy usage screen on the center console, about 1kW) until the dash gauge changed from '--' to an actual number. Sure enough, the first number displayed was 5.1. Try that and see what you get.

I am in SF Bay area and I got 5.2 m/kwh on LEAF dash over about 2.5 months and little over 3000 miles which is almost the entire life of my LEAF. I recently reset the average.
Most of my miles are during my commute on 85 and 280 with various mountainous sections on 280. I use the techniques mentioned by OP. Also, I watch the dot display and avoid exceeding 2 dots most of the time either way for regen or drive. I rarely use Climate Control and use vent instead.

I'm averaging 4.9 by doing nothing special whatsoever! :lol:

leafetarian said:

I am in SF Bay area and I got 5.2 m/kwh on LEAF dash over about 2.5 months and little over 3000 miles which is almost the entire life of my LEAF. I recently reset the average.
Most of my miles are during my commute on 85 and 280 with various mountainous sections on 280. I use the techniques mentioned by OP. Also, I watch the dot display and avoid exceeding 2 dots most of the time either way for regen or drive. I rarely use Climate Control and use vent instead.

Click to expand...

leafetarian said:

I am in SF Bay area and I got 5.2 m/kwh on LEAF dash over about 2.5 months and little over 3000 miles which is almost the entire life of my LEAF. I recently reset the average.
Most of my miles are during my commute on 85 and 280 with various mountainous sections on 280. I use the techniques mentioned by OP. Also, I watch the dot display and avoid exceeding 2 dots most of the time either way for regen or drive. I rarely use Climate Control and use vent instead.

Click to expand...

I've seen several people mention the technique of limiting the number of dots during acceleration, but I'm not convinced that this makes much of a difference. Unlike an ICE, the efficiency curve of an electric motor is fairly flat. In other words, while accelerating with 4 bubbles takes twice the amount of power as accelerating with 2 bubbles, it only takes half the time to reach your target speed, so the total power used is about the same.

I did some limited experiments to test this, measuring the time taken to accelerate to 30mph at 10 kW vs. 20 kW. I did these experiments on a long, flat road parallel to a runway, 3 trials in each direction and power setting. At 10 kW, it took an average of 20 seconds, and at 20 kW it took an average of 10 seconds, which supports the hypothesis. I didn't get a chance to do more experiments at higher power settings (my data logger had to bail), but I plan to when I get a chance.

I've also seen very little impact on my miles/kWh from A/C use on my commute (I reset and log every trip) with temps in the 90s.

SparkyEV said:

I've seen several people mention the technique of limiting the number of dots during acceleration, but I'm not convinced that this makes much of a difference.

Click to expand...

I agree with you that the extra bubble of acceleration itself isn't inefficient, but picking up extra speed that then has to be bled off between stoplights or when catching up to traffic is certainly very wasteful. Limiting acceleration would tend to avoid braking, and is the main reason that ECO mode works.

Last month, not using A/C, I averaged around 5.6m/Kwh on the dash (5.8 on the console). This month, using A/C, I've averaged 5.3(5.5 console) so far.
And I'm with Dave as I rarely use my brakes in ECO mode. There's no comparison between my wife's Corolla front disc wheels (only drives it 50 miles a week now) and my four as I rarely see any brake dust. :mrgreen:

davewill said:

SparkyEV said:

I've seen several people mention the technique of limiting the number of dots during acceleration, but I'm not convinced that this makes much of a difference.

Click to expand...

I agree with you that the extra bubble of acceleration itself isn't inefficient, but picking up extra speed that then has to be bled off between stoplights or when catching up to traffic is certainly very wasteful. Limiting acceleration would tend to avoid braking, and is the main reason that ECO mode works.

Click to expand...

Yes, limiting *speed* will certainly make a difference, but I was saying that I don't think limiting *acceleration* for the same target speed will make a difference. Also, switching to coast (or regen if you need to slow down faster) as soon as you see that you need to slow down, such as when a light turns yellow or traffic slows down, is important.

LEAFfan said:

Last month, not using A/C, I averaged around 5.6m/Kwh on the dash (5.8 on the console). This month, using A/C, I've averaged 5.3(5.5 console) so far.

Click to expand...

That's in Phoenix, right? How many kW is the A/C pulling typically? Here in NorCal where the temps have maxed out in the mid-90s, my A/C only pulls about 200W once it reaches equilibrium.

SparkyEV said:

Yes, limiting *speed* will certainly make a difference, but I was saying that I don't think limiting *acceleration* for the same target speed will make a difference. Also, switching to coast (or regen if you need to slow down faster) as soon as you see that you need to slow down, such as when a light turns yellow or traffic slows down, is important.

Click to expand...

I acknowledged that. I simply don't believe that anyone who accelerates faster doesn't also end up braking harder a lot of the time.

Anyone have dash M/kWh for various speeds yet? Unfortunately roads around here tend to undulate quite a bit making these types of tests difficult (not to mention traffic).

SparkyEV said:

I did some limited experiments to test this, measuring the time taken to accelerate to 30mph at 10 kW vs. 20 kW. I did these experiments on a long, flat road parallel to a runway, 3 trials in each direction and power setting. At 10 kW, it took an average of 20 seconds, and at 20 kW it took an average of 10 seconds, which supports the hypothesis. I didn't get a chance to do more experiments at higher power settings (my data logger had to bail), but I plan to when I get a chance.

I've also seen very little impact on my miles/kWh from A/C use on my commute (I reset and log every trip) with temps in the 90s.

Click to expand...

doubling acceleration rates requires more than double the speed. its like others have stated. when the average speed on a 40 mph hour road is 30 mph that means getting in a hurry to get to 40 mph is not providing a benefit.

when the objective is primarily not to stop or at least not slow enough where brakes are required, faster acceleration is not a benefit.