Meeting with Nissan, Phoenix, Jan 8, 2013, 6pm, drinks prior

[TonyWilliams]

If it can be shown across a broad population of cars that LEAFs are losing capacity faster in hot climates than they are in cooler climates, and LEAFs are losing capacity faster than Teslas and Volts, at some point they have to accept the story the data tells.

I don't know why we focus on this "accepting". They know the issues, whether they publically state them or not.

As things stand now, the big hole in "the plan" is this late summer, when we have 100's of multi-bar losers who don't meet the 66.24% capacity threshold of 9 to 8 capacity bars, yet their cars are 20-30% reduced in range, and nobody told them that when they bought the car.

Again, it doesn't matter if Nissan publically ackowledges that heat bakes batteries.

[Ingineer]

Personally, and as an experienced EV Engineer, I agree with Nissan for choosing passive cooling. I do not think in the future we will see much active cooling for EV battery systems.

The chemistry will improve so as to be more heat tolerant, and the problems we have now will disappear!

If Nissan had installed active cooling, the Leaf would be heavier, have less range, and be significantly more costly. In addition, Active cooling requires power, which means it must be plugged in most of the time or even more drastic range reduction will occur.

Keep in mind, it's not actually proven there is much actual degradation! I believe it's a combination of a small amount of degradation combined with instrumentation errors (failures), and that once Nissan corrects the software in the LBC (Battery ECU), apparent "lost" capacity will return. Let's at least give them time to fix this before condemning them!

Just because a Leaf owner cannot drive as far, doesn't mean the battery has a fault. The LBC determines all charging and discharging limits, and if it's being "overprotective" like I suspect, once they correct this, range will magically return. If it doesn't, Nissan will fix it. Regardless, I'm convinced Andy was sincere and Nissan is going to make this right.

-Phil

[myleaf]

Would it be possible to get answers in writing to some of these questions? Perhaps the "Ask Nissan" forum could be revived, instead of having meetings in person?

Yes. In addition to the video coming out, I will work on posting the answers I can in the questions thread I started, and add to them as I/we get more from Nissan.

Can Jeff Kuhlman (HAWK0630) run through the list and provide answers to some of the questions ?

[Ingineer]

Perhaps not, but Phil posted a picture of a tire with "Energy" and "215/50R17" on the sidewall. It looks like there could be more words following the word "Energy".

It reads "ENERGY Saver A/S" on the sidewall. Here are my 3 tire pictures:







I've got a Hi-res version of all of them if anyone needs more info.

-Phil

[EdmondLeaf]

Keep in mind, it's not actually proven there is much actual degradation! I believe it's a combination of a small amount of degradation combined with instrumentation errors (failures), and that once Nissan corrects the software in the LBC (Battery ECU), apparent "lost" capacity will return.
-Phil

That is great new.

[thankyouOB]

Chels,
with regard to your post at 12:57 today:
it is nice to have a pro working at this.

you write well, you are clear and summarize with efficiency and accuracy, you know how to project integrity, and you seem to be sufficiently stubborn and subtle enough to deal with a corporate environment. Now, if we could just swap "get results from" for "deal with", we all might see some progress.

good luck on the questions and getting the answers.
i really get that the human exchange in AZ was an important part of having real communication. I would like to think that real communication would lead to changes at Nissan for those of us who bought the LEAF in 2011.

[myleaf]

Personally, and as an experienced EV Engineer, I agree with Nissan for choosing passive cooling. I do not think in the future we will see much active cooling for EV battery systems.

The chemistry will improve so as to be more heat tolerant, and the problems we have now will disappear!


-Phil

I agree, active cooling always seemed like a bandaid to me.

But from the town hall meeting it seems that heat tolerant battery chemistries will not be available (at Nissan) in the near future

[TonyWilliams]

Just because a Leaf owner cannot drive as far, doesn't mean the battery has a fault.

Certainly, that sentiment was expressed at the meeting by several. They really don't care about bars and batteries, they just want the car to go the distance it is supposed to.

[DarkDave]

Keep in mind, it's not actually proven there is much actual degradation! I believe it's a combination of a small amount of degradation combined with instrumentation errors (failures), and that once Nissan corrects the software in the LBC (Battery ECU), apparent "lost" capacity will return. Let's at least give them time to fix this before condemning them!

-Phil

To me job #1 should be to fix the software. From the town hall meeting, it sounds like applying the MY 2013 software to our cars is not going to be fix we are hoping for. I've completely given up on using the GoM and only use my gidmeter and Tony's range chant to determine how far I can drive given my car's degraded battery. I think it would engender a lot of good will and confidence if Nissan could make the gauge as accurate as possible for both range and battery health. I don't want a pessimistic gauge at all, ever. I want it to be accurate. Just doing that would give people more confidence in their cars, especially with a degraded battery.

In my car, if I go by the gauge I should never be able to drive more than 45 miles ever given my daily commuting habits on an 80% charge. I have routinely proven that I can actually drive to 55-58 miles using the gidmeter and range chart.

[palmermd]

... Tony's range chant...

Freud?