Capacity Loss on 2011-2012 LEAFs

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Before anybody signs an attorney/client priviledge document, please take a deep breath (EVEN AFTER MR. PERRY'S or other Nissan decision maker's announcement in the coming weeks) and wait a week or two. My honest opinion is that there may be no other logical option, but companies don't "fix" things in litigation. They can't. They'd lose, since that's akin to admitting their product was faulty.

Anyway, all I'm asking for is wait a week AFTER the announcement. We'll hash it out here. If you still, then, don't have a good taste for the situation, do what you have to do.
 
The only people that do well in this type of litigation are the lawyers not the individual or Class they represent. Most litigation is settled. When matters are settled the lawyers get paid for every hour they put in. While the individual plaintiff or Class receives very little. Usually no more and often less than a reputable Company being sued would have worked out informally without a lawsuit. Nissan is a reputable Company and will ultimately do the right thing. The problem is, as with most large Companys,there are so many bureaucratic layers that it takes a while for them to come up with a plan to do what is right.I am confident Nissan will not let their (Billions) in EV investment be diminished by inaction. Hang in there as Tony suggests.
 
Pulled out of the garage this morning for my 4am commute to work and capacity bar #12 was gone. Current odometer 20,165. My wife has been driving the LEAF for the past few weeks and swears they were all there when she parked it last night.....
 
Ok, now you guys are starting to worry me. I didn't buy my Leaf to have to worry about all of this sh#t. If Nissan knew this was a bad product (battery) I want out. We all knew there were limitations and bought assuming we could live with these limitations. What I am reading here is that they put out a defective product. Therefore this is not what I signed up for. I want out.
I love the car and I have not had any issues with it. But reading this thread has me wishing I had made a different decision. If there is a buy out I will take it. Or if there is a new battery swap that fixes this mess I would do that. I will follow thread to see what remedies are forthcoming. Mahalo to all that are working on this problem on MNL. Aloha
 
downeykp said:
Ok, now you guys are starting to worry me. I didn't buy my Leaf to have to worry about all of this sh#t. If Nissan knew this was a bad product (battery) I want out. We all knew there were limitations and bought assuming we could live with these limitations. What I am reading here is that they put out a defective product. Therefore this is not what I signed up for. I want out.
I love the car and I have not had any issues with it. But reading this thread has me wishing I had made a different decision. If there is a buy out I will take it. Or if there is a new battery swap that fixes this mess I would do that. I will follow thread to see what remedies are forthcoming. Mahalo to all that are working on this problem on MNL. Aloha

The thing is that we don't know the shape of the capacity loss "curve." If it is steep at first and then flattens, then most of us should be OK. If it's linear, then we are in trouble. Only time will tell if Nissan doesn't tell us.
 
Leland said:
Pulled out of the garage this morning for my 4am commute to work and capacity bar #12 was gone. Current odometer 20,165. My wife has been driving the LEAF for the past few weeks and swears they were all there when she parked it last night.....
Added to Wiki. Please file a case with Nissan and report case number and date reported to Nissan for the Wiki. What is your charging pattern? Thanks.
 
edatoakrun said:
="Stoaty"...Note: when I did the graph previously in another thread, I did not plot against annual mileage,which is the correct figure. I believe the current analysis is the correct one...

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?

Stoaty said:
... here is the latest data on one bar capacity loss in the Phoenix area. Plot is annual mileage vs. months to first capacity bar loss. There are 26 data points.

Slope = -1,274
Intercept = 29,095
Correlation coefficient = 0.51

Interpretation: There is a moderate correlation between annual mileage and number of months to first capacity bar loss. This data suggests that some of the capacity loss may indeed be due to cycling losses rather than calendar losses.

Note: when I did the graph previously in another thread, I did not plot against annual mileage,which is the correct figure. I believe the current analysis is the correct one.

phoenixonebarloss.jpg
Gee, I wish I knew what you guys are talking about. Is it OK if I just drive and enjoy my car? :roll:
 
stanley said:
The only people that do well in this type of litigation are the lawyers not the individual or Class they represent. Most litigation is settled. When matters are settled the lawyers get paid for every hour they put in. While the individual plaintiff or Class receives very little. Usually no more and often less than a reputable Company being sued would have worked out informally without a lawsuit. Nissan is a reputable Company and will ultimately do the right thing. The problem is, as with most large Companys,there are so many bureaucratic layers that it takes a while for them to come up with a plan to do what is right.I am confident Nissan will not let their (Billions) in EV investment be diminished by inaction. Hang in there as Tony suggests.
+1. Well said Stanley. IMHO, if some of the hysteria displayed on this forum keeps feeding on its self, and the lawyers get started, we could be responsible for "who killed the Electric Car--Part 2".

Anyway, since I bought mine, no one can take it away from me and crush it. :(
 
downeykp said:
Ok, now you guys are starting to worry me. I didn't buy my Leaf to have to worry about all of this sh#t. If Nissan knew this was a bad product (battery) I want out. We all knew there were limitations and bought assuming we could live with these limitations. What I am reading here is that they put out a defective product. Therefore this is not what I signed up for. I want out.

My suggestion, for those concerned about the life of their LEAF's battery, is to think of it this way:

1) If you almost always see five bars or less on the battery temperature gage, and it only gets up to six bars a handful of times each summer...

Don't worry about it. Your car's battery is likely to perform far better than the quoted capacity loss of 20% at 5 years and 30% at 10 years. Essentially, you live in an ideal environment for very slow degradation of the battery. Feel free to rack up lots of miles and quick-charge when needed. The battery will, likely, perform very well for a very long time.


2) If you see five bars or less during the winter half of the year and, fairly often, see six bars during the summer half...

You, probably, are going to see the quoted loss (20% loss at 5 and 30% loss at 10). If your driving needs are sufficiently small that you can afford to lose 20% of your range at 5 years and 30% at 10 years, there's, probably, nothing to be concerned about. Of course, if you put a lot of miles on your car, the degradation rate will be faster.


3) If seeing six bars is common for a large part of the year and an, occasional, seventh bar pops up during the summer months...

Don't consider buying. And, only consider leasing if you can handle the possibility of only having 75% of your original range at the end of your lease. Things might be better, or they might be worse, but it's not worth taking the risk to buy the car.


4) If you spend a large part of the summer with seven temperature bars, or more, showing...

It's, probably, best to stay away completely, unless you only need to travel very short distances each day. Only consider a short-term lease, if that. Don't even think about buying. The car's battery (and by extension the car itself) is not likely to be worth much after a few years.



I would consider just about anywhere in western Washington to be in the first group. In other words, there's, likely, nothing to worry about and your car's battery is, likely, to perform very well for a very long time. The handful of times temps get into the 90s for a few hours on a summer afternoon, are not likely to have a significant impact.
 
[Queen] Another one bites the dust! [/Queen]

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. 1 bar (js)
11. No known capacity loss. 80% charges, owned 1 year, only 5000 miles driven (em)

So...

91% already lost 1 to 3 bars
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...
 
Stoaty said:
...
I lost the first bar at 3500 miles after just 3.5 month (End of June to Beginning of October - so all through summer)
I lost the second at 10500 miles after 12 month (just before the yearly battery check or just at the start of the next summer)
I lost my third capacity bar at Aug 14, 12000miles, Chandler, AZ, 12000 miles, owned: 14 months (just after we hit 118F)
...

toasted in 12,000 miles- holly crap! I'm getting to the point where nothing short of an across the board recall and replacement of the traction battery for all of us with a "new and improved" chemistry is going to keep me on board. the battery appears so susceptible to heat that any spikes in temperature even here in Seattle has me wringing my hands. I am trying to tell myself it's irrational, but the reality is I just didn't buy the car with the understanding that we'd be seeing such extreme examples of a fundamental failure in design, particularly of the battery, in such a short time.
 
Yep, and I know I am getting close to my second with our two weeks of extended heat here...

Frankly, I've stopped recommending the Leaf to anyone until we know how this pans out...

GaslessInSeattle said:
toasted in 12,000 miles- holly crap! I'm getting to the point where nothing short of an across the board recall and replacement of the traction battery for all of us with a "new and improved" chemistry is going to keep me on board. the battery appears so susceptible to heat that any spikes in temperature even here in Seattle has me wringing my hands. I am trying to tell myself it's irrational, but the reality is I just didn't buy the car with the understanding that we'd be seeing such extreme examples of a fundamental failure in design, particularly of the battery, in such a short time.
 
TomT said:
Frankly, I've stopped recommending the Leaf to anyone until we know how this pans out...

Me too, unless they want to lease, and understand that the battery may have a significant reduction in range during that time, that Nissan is not likely to do much about.

Even my new lease car (May 27, 2012) is taking a hit on range in the past week or two. I punished the living crap out of it with 10 quick charges in a day, at 10 temperature bars (on the BC2BC trip), but that still meets Mark Perry's in person specific counsel that as long as I wasn't in the red temperature zone, "all was well".

Bull crap.

I did a drive up to Santa Ysabel (elevation 3000 feet/1000 meters) this afternoon in almost 100F/38C temperatures, without really spending much time worrying about range. (I've driven to Julian in the heat of September and the cold of March, which is further and 1000 feet/300 meters higher in elevation than Santa Ysabel. Granted, this trip wasn't any science experiment; I just wanted to check out the progress with the DC charger up there (nothing yet!!!).

Anyway, I found myself without a lot of excess energy on the return. Maybe I should just charge more? :ugeek:
 
Stoaty said:
edatoakrun said:
High miles per month would also be generally indicative of those battery packs that tend to be cycled from very high to very low states of charge, and/or are heated, by frequent mid-day recharging, above those temperatures caused by ambient conditions.

So I think that the correlation of loss of capacity and cycling that you point out, could actually be, in part or in all, only coincidental.
Agreed. It could be higher depth of discharge, being left at high SOC for longer periods of time in order to do a longer commute, heating from mid-day recharging, etc. The main thing is that this is the first time I have found a correlation that suggests that calendar loss from high heat is not the only factor; something about the battery cycling seems to be involved also.
I agree that all these factors are interrelated, but I don't believe that implies the correlation Stoaty has found with this new plot is coincidental. I have believed for some months, based upon a few pairwise comparisons, that mileage played a supporting role in battery degradation. Thank you, Stoaty, for presenting this data.
 
The next time OrientExpress gives us the next LEAF revelation, just consider these previous revelations about the battery:


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 just tossed aside with... "your methodology does not support your conclusions". This is 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."
 
RegGuheert said:
leafkabob said:
1. Azdre & Opossum - April 26, 2012. 16.6K miles/13 months ownership. Phoenix (2nd bar loss reported 6/14/2012 @~19K miles) (8/2/2012)
2. bturner - May 12, 2012. 13.6K/12 months. Phoenix (2nd bar loss reported 7/7/2012) (9/1/2012)
3. turbo2ltr - May 18, 2012. 13K/15 months. Phoenix (2nd bar loss reported 6/29/2012) (8/10/2012)
6. Mark13 - May 22, 2012. 15.7K/12 months. Phoenix (2nd bar loss reported 7/1/2012) (8/10/2012)
23. jhm614 - May 15, 2012, 25K/14.5 months, Arlington, TX (2nd bar loss reported on 7/7/2012) (8/29/2012)
I have added a date in red which shows when these cars would lose their third bar assuming it takes exactly the same number of days it took to lose the second one. Of course no one knows if these cars will lose their third bar before, on, or after these dates and there are many factors which will affect that, including the temperatures in Phoenix and Arlington, but I wanted to make some markers that we could track.
Just a quick follow-up on this post. Three of these dates are now in the past and none of those three made it onto the 3-bar loss list yet. So for this small sample, it does not seem like accelerating or even constant loss rate.

We're getting a lot of data recently and Stoaty has done a great job with plotting it, so we should start seeing clear trends in how this loss progresses.

Thanks to Stoaty and Vicki and everyone else for maintaining the data in Wiki!
 
RegGuheert said:
RegGuheert said:
leafkabob said:
1. Azdre & Opossum - April 26, 2012. 16.6K miles/13 months ownership. Phoenix (2nd bar loss reported 6/14/2012 @~19K miles) (8/2/2012)
2. bturner - May 12, 2012. 13.6K/12 months. Phoenix (2nd bar loss reported 7/7/2012) (9/1/2012)
3. turbo2ltr - May 18, 2012. 13K/15 months. Phoenix (2nd bar loss reported 6/29/2012) (8/10/2012)
6. Mark13 - May 22, 2012. 15.7K/12 months. Phoenix (2nd bar loss reported 7/1/2012) (8/10/2012)
23. jhm614 - May 15, 2012, 25K/14.5 months, Arlington, TX (2nd bar loss reported on 7/7/2012) (8/29/2012)
I have added a date in red which shows when these cars would lose their third bar assuming it takes exactly the same number of days it took to lose the second one. Of course no one knows if these cars will lose their third bar before, on, or after these dates and there are many factors which will affect that, including the temperatures in Phoenix and Arlington, but I wanted to make some markers that we could track.
Just a quick follow-up on this post. Three of these dates are now in the past and none of those three made it onto the 3-bar loss list yet. So for this small sample, it does not seem like accelerating or even constant loss rate.

We're getting a lot of data recently and Stoaty has done a great job with plotting it, so we should start seeing clear trends in how this loss progresses.

Thanks to Stoaty and Vicki and everyone else for maintaining the data in Wiki!


Why would you assume this implies no accelerated loss,, other factors play roll as well , distance traveled , charge cycle, heat cycles. not to mention 3 points is very limited It would likely be average of points. like 1 early, 1 late 1 near mid. and if they all fall off a few days from now. Just seems like your rushing to conclusions.
 
RegGuheert said:
RegGuheert said:
leafkabob said:
1. Azdre & Opossum - April 26, 2012. 16.6K miles/13 months ownership. Phoenix (2nd bar loss reported 6/14/2012 @~19K miles) (8/2/2012)
2. bturner - May 12, 2012. 13.6K/12 months. Phoenix (2nd bar loss reported 7/7/2012) (9/1/2012)
3. turbo2ltr - May 18, 2012. 13K/15 months. Phoenix (2nd bar loss reported 6/29/2012) (8/10/2012)
6. Mark13 - May 22, 2012. 15.7K/12 months. Phoenix (2nd bar loss reported 7/1/2012) (8/10/2012)
23. jhm614 - May 15, 2012, 25K/14.5 months, Arlington, TX (2nd bar loss reported on 7/7/2012) (8/29/2012)
I have added a date in red which shows when these cars would lose their third bar assuming it takes exactly the same number of days it took to lose the second one. Of course no one knows if these cars will lose their third bar before, on, or after these dates and there are many factors which will affect that, including the temperatures in Phoenix and Arlington, but I wanted to make some markers that we could track.
Just a quick follow-up on this post. Three of these dates are now in the past and none of those three made it onto the 3-bar loss list yet. So for this small sample, it does not seem like accelerating or even constant loss rate.

We're getting a lot of data recently and Stoaty has done a great job with plotting it, so we should start seeing clear trends in how this loss progresses.

Thanks to Stoaty and Vicki and everyone else for maintaining the data in Wiki!

If second and third bar loss corresponds only to equal percentages of battery of battery degradation, which many seem to assume, and if capacity bar loss is primarily the result of ambient temperature exposure, which, IMO, now does seem to be a near certainty, then the third bar losses for these LEAFs (and others with second bar losses in early Summer) might be expected to occur, on average, after shorter time intervals, since they have probably been exposed to even higher ambient temperatures after the second bar loss, than they were during the previous one-to-two bar loss time interval.
 
RegGuheert said:
RegGuheert said:
leafkabob said:
1. Azdre & Opossum - April 26, 2012. 16.6K miles/13 months ownership. Phoenix (2nd bar loss reported 6/14/2012 @~19K miles) (8/2/2012)
2. bturner - May 12, 2012. 13.6K/12 months. Phoenix (2nd bar loss reported 7/7/2012) (9/1/2012)
3. turbo2ltr - May 18, 2012. 13K/15 months. Phoenix (2nd bar loss reported 6/29/2012) (8/10/2012)
6. Mark13 - May 22, 2012. 15.7K/12 months. Phoenix (2nd bar loss reported 7/1/2012) (8/10/2012)
23. jhm614 - May 15, 2012, 25K/14.5 months, Arlington, TX (2nd bar loss reported on 7/7/2012) (8/29/2012)
I have added a date in red which shows when these cars would lose their third bar assuming it takes exactly the same number of days it took to lose the second one. Of course no one knows if these cars will lose their third bar before, on, or after these dates and there are many factors which will affect that, including the temperatures in Phoenix and Arlington, but I wanted to make some markers that we could track.
Just a quick follow-up on this post. Three of these dates are now in the past and none of those three made it onto the 3-bar loss list yet. So for this small sample, it does not seem like accelerating or even constant loss rate.
There are some factors that I think can explain it for our particular car...
1. We went out of town for a while.
2. Then Nissan had our car for about a week and a half. They likely didn't put on as many high-temp cycles as we would have.
3. Then we started taking our other car on some trips around town that would have been difficult in our reduced-capacity Leaf, so the Leaf wasn't seeing as many miles put on it.
4. And we also had a brief stretch where the high temperatures were "only" in the 90s (before the recent heat hit). :lol:

But hey, another fast charger just got installed and it's pretty close to our house, so we'll see what we can do about using our car to its full potential. :shock:
 
Stoaty said:
Just received a PM reporting loss of 3 capacity bars from a new member, gk1. Here is his report:

"I lost my third capacity bar on my LEAF a few days ago and throught this might be interesting information to add to your list.

I lost the first bar at 3500 miles after just 3.5 month (End of June to Beginning of October - so all through summer)
I lost the second at 10500 miles after 12 month (just before the yearly battery check or just at the start of the next summer)
I lost my third capacity bar at Aug 14, 12000miles, Chandler, AZ, 12000 miles, owned: 14 months (just after we hit 118F)

I reported the first one immediately and they had the car for a cople of days and told me afterwards that this is "normal". I didn't get a case number for this, but I still have the initial email response, the battery report and the phone number of the engineer."

His VIN is listed as 05080. Leaf delivered June 27, 2011

Added all three bar losses to the Wiki tables.
 
Back
Top