LEAF Range and kWh use, at 45, 60 and 70 mph DOE tests

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.
DaveinOlyWA said:
...Like Tony, i think there is something missing from the report (since there is very little said about how the test was done) that might be more important than the testers realized?

29 pages of test procedures that may answer your questions are available from the page I linked in the OP, and directly here:

http://avt.inel.gov/pdf/fsev/eva/etatp4r3.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Excerpted from the Initial conditions and prerequisites:

...4.3.1 Road tests shall be performed on a road or test track which is level
to within 1%...

4.6 Tires provided with the vehicle shall be the standard tire offered by the
Electric Vehicle manufacturer, and shall be inflated to the manufacturer’s
(placard) recommended cold inflation pressures. This pressure shall not
exceed the maximum allowable pressure imprinted upon the tire’s sidewall...

4.8 Accessories shall not be used during testing activities...


And specific to the 60 mph test:

5.2 Range at 60 mph Constant Speed
The purpose of this section is to determine the maximum range the vehicle
can achieve with the batteries fully charged (100% SOC), the vehicle
loaded at curb weight plus 332 pounds, and operated at a constant 60 mph.
This testing shall be completed subject to the initial conditions and
prerequisites stated in Section 4 of this procedure.
5.2.1 Instrument the vehicle to obtain, at a minimum, the data identified
in Section 4.10. Calibrate the fifth wheel, as necessary.
5.2.2 Verify the traction battery is at fully charged (100% SOC).
5.2.3 Record odometer reading and time on Appendix B.
5.2.4 Adjust the vehicle’s cold tire pressures to match the manufacturer’s
placard value, or the maximum cold inflation pressure imprinted
upon the tire’s sidewall, whichever is less.
5.2.5 From a standing start, accelerate the vehicle under its own power to
a speed of 60 mph ± 1 mph (96 km/h ± 1.6 km/h). Speed and time
may be recorded via a Data Acquisition System (DAS.)
5.2.6 Each time the vehicle passes the lap marker, record the SOC meter
reading and the odometer reading. Each reading shall be recorded
in the smallest increment displayed by it’s respective indicator.
5.2.7 Maintain this speed without interruption until an average vehicle lap
speed of at least 57 mph (91 km/h) cannot be maintained. If testing
is being accomplished at FaAA, continue testing until the vehicle
will not maintain 53 mph on the east bound straight-away. Record
the final speed, odometer reading and time on Appendix B. (This
may be recorded via a DAS.)
5.2.8 Pull the vehicle off to the side of the test track. Record the time,
mileage, SOC meter and odometer reading on Appendix B...

It does not seem to list specific criteria for the 70 mph test.

Otherwise, about the only additional information I'd like to see is the actual test site's elevation profile.

As I said earlier:

Sublime said:
jpa2825 said:
Can anyone provide an Executive Summary for Dummies? Avg. m/kWh at 45, 60 & 70 mph maybe?

From the battery (from the wall):
45mph = 4.85mi/kWh (3.94mi/kWh)
60mph = 3.70mi/kWh (3.04mi/kWh)
70mph = 2.92mi/kWh (2.48mi/kWh)

I was about to do that, thanks!

IMO, this is some of the most interesting data from this report, that the m/kWh seemed to test out considerably lower than that most have guessed...

Meaning, of course, that estimates of available battery capacity from range tests using higher m/kWh estimates may be suspect.
 
edatoakrun said:
Meaning, of course, that estimates of available battery capacity from range tests using higher m/kWh estimates may be suspect.
It all depends on how the lab's numbers (m/kWh) corresponds to Leaf's m/kWh. Afterall, what we have to go by is what Leaf shows on the dash - not what the lab measured using special equipment by tapping directly to the battery output.
 
evnow said:
edatoakrun said:
Meaning, of course, that estimates of available battery capacity from range tests using higher m/kWh estimates may be suspect.

It all depends on how the lab's numbers (m/kWh) corresponds to Leaf's m/kWh. Afterall, what we have to go by is what Leaf shows on the dash...

I never have.

What compels you to do so?

After all the evidence that the dash m/kWh is not a reliable data source?

The dash m/kWh is nothing more than a lower-accuracy display of the miles driven and kWh use as reported by Carwings.

When I examined each of those factors individually for my LEAF, the errors in both were, and still are discernible.

As to the error in miles reported by the dash:

...All 2011-2 LEAFs, AFAIK, have reported the same Carwings odometer and Dash m/kWh error of consistently under-reporting by ~2.5%.

So if your CW miles driven is ~2.5% lower than your dash odometer miles, and your dash m/kWh is showing ~2.5% less than your nav screen m/kWh (0.1 m/kWh lower below ~6 m/kWh, and 0.2 m/kWh lower when you are getting over ~6 m/kWh) this is "normal" for 2011-2012 LEAFs.

Hopefully, Nissan has fixed this error in the 2013s. Any readers have a CW equipped 2013? Please check and report back...

The Dash, nav screen and CW m/kWh all are mathematically "correct" as a function of the total kWh use reported by CW for every trip, day, or months driving.

It's just that the dash uses the same ~2.5% understated miles to make its calculation of m/kWh as CW does, while the nav screen is always accurate as a function of reported kWh use, as it uses the dash odometer miles, for the m/kWh calculation.

Got it?

BTW, while every LEAF driver, AFAIK, has reported the dash odometer as very close to correct, while using stock tires and wheels, IMO it wouldn't hurt to confirm your dash odometer is correct, by checking with another source, such as Google maps...

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=11769" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As to the error in kWh used in the dash m/kWh, all evidence is it is not fixed, but variable between LEAFs, and at least in my LEAF, over time:

...If “gids” do reflect a variable amount of Wh, and they are the values used by the LEAF to calculate kWh use, then the capacity bar displays, dash and nav screen displays of m/kWh, as well as the Carwings calculations based on these same “gid” values, might be expected to be incorrect as well.

I now believe that this quite possibly could be the case.

I have been noticing an unexplained increase in my dash, nav Screen, and Carwings m/kWh results for a few months now, not only on this test trip, but on other trips, and my long term m/kWh averages.

Before I questioned the accuracies both of the screens and of Carwings, I thought the likely explanations for increased efficiency results, were increased efficiency, in either the driver or vehicle...

This does not seem to be what I am seeing.

I think that my range tests may indicate that whatever method my LEAF uses to calculate kWh, is variable, and has been significantly understating the recent amounts of kWh use, and has probably increasingly inflated all my m/kWh reports, from the dash, nav screen, and CW.

And of course, this could reflect Tick Tocks observations of variable “gid” Wh values. Gids with higher Wh content could lower the calculated kWh numbers, and raise all the m/kWh results....

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=9064&start=20" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

A few weeks after I wrote that, the Phoenix range test LEAFs, ostensibly with test variables controlled, were reported to have dash m/kWh displays varying from 3.7 to 4.4 (and BTW) averaging just over 4.2.

http://mynissanleaf.com/wiki/index.php?title=Battery_Capacity_Loss" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Why would you believe that any one's guess of the correct m/kWh value for any given speed, within the large ranges reported from the dash displays, could be depended on to accurately asses kWh use for all LEAFs?
 
I don't really see anything surprising here. I think 65 miles range at 60 mph is pretty accurate and reflects my experience when driving on flat roads like 101. My vehicle is a 2012 still with all 12 bars and only 7100 miles on the odometer so far, coming on 8 months. I would not assume this was a vehicle with a degraded battery.

Today I drove a little over 80 miles total, mostly freeway, and I had to quick charge to make it back home even though I drove 65 mph on the first main freeway leg, and 58 mph on the return leg. I will have all the carwings data tomorrow. I have the data for first leg already which was 36.4 miles, 9.5 kWh (10.1 used / 0.6 recharged), coming to 3.8 miles/kWh .
 
madbrain said:
I don't really see anything surprising here. I think 65 miles range at 60 mph is pretty accurate...

I know you and I have had some bizarre (to me, anyway) differences of opinion of what is normal. A new LEAF doesn't go only 65 miles with the heater off, level terrain, no wind, with a balanced pack at 70F degrees and 60 mph. While your car may or may not do that, neither your car nor your observations reflect the reality of a new LEAF. Here's some light reading:

Previous Planning for Sept 15, 2012 Phoenix Range Test

Sept 15, 2012 Phoenix Range Test

Subsequent 2013 LEAF-S Range Test on Feb 22, 2013

Subsequent 2012 & 2013 LEAF-SL Range Test, San Diego, March 8, 2013
 
madbrain said:
I don't really see anything surprising here. I think 65 miles range at 60 mph is pretty accurate and reflects my experience when driving on flat roads like 101. My vehicle is a 2012 still with all 12 bars and only 7100 miles on the odometer so far, coming on 8 months. I would not assume this was a vehicle with a degraded battery.

Today I drove a little over 80 miles total, mostly freeway, and I had to quick charge to make it back home even though I drove 65 mph on the first main freeway leg, and 58 mph on the return leg. I will have all the carwings data tomorrow. I have the data for first leg already which was 36.4 miles, 9.5 kWh (10.1 used / 0.6 recharged), coming to 3.8 miles/kWh .


how much did you quick charge? (how many Kwh) what was your remaining capacity when you got home? (make sure you clarify how you got this) and what was miles/kwh for the trip?

on degradation; how often have you seen 7 TB's or more?
 
edatoakrun said:
I never have.

What compels you to do so?
Compel is a strong word. This is apparently a free country and nobody compels you to do such things.

Ofcourse, the initial driver was to find the useable capacity of the battery. Then, the idea was to give some help to owners to estimate "range left" in a way that is more accurate (or less inaccurate) than the GOM.

Let us look at it differently - how exactly would I use this new info from the lab ?
 
Tony,

TonyWilliams said:
madbrain said:
I don't really see anything surprising here. I think 65 miles range at 60 mph is pretty accurate...

I know you and I have had some bizarre (to me, anyway) differences of opinion of what is normal. A new LEAF doesn't go only 65 miles with the heater off, level terrain, no wind, with a balanced pack at 70F degrees and 60 mph. While your car may or may not do that, neither your car nor your observations reflect the reality of a new LEAF.

I didn't say I didn't use climate control. I had AC on. No idea what the battery temperature was. There was some wind.

I got partial data for yesterday from Carwings. Still missing the last leg from saturday because I stayed home all day sunday and the car didn't upload it to Carwings yet.

1. 9.5 kWh net / 10.1 kWh used / 0.6 kWh recharged . 36.4 miles driven . 3.8 miles/kWh .
2. 0.3 kWh net / 0.5 kWh used / 0.2 kWh recharged . 1.1 miles driven . 3.5 miles/kWh
3. 5.1 kWh net / 5.6 kWh used / 0.4 kWh recharged . 23.0 miles driven . 4.5 miles/kWh
4. 1.1 kWh net / 1.4 kWh used / 0.3 kWh recharged . 4.6 miles driven . 4.2 miles/kWh
5. 0.5 kWh net / 0.6 kWh used / 0.1 kWh recharged . 1.3 miles driven . 2.8 miles/kWh

First leg was home in San Jose to 680 to 101 to San Mateo. I kept freeway speed at 65mph. There is some downhill from my home to 680 which inflates the average miles/kWh.

Second leg is city driving in San Mateo.

Third leg was 101 freeway at 58 mph in a futile attempt to avoid charging before getting back home. Driving 58 on 101 is not fun. I exited at Lawrence to stop at Fry's in Sunnyvale. I don't have my Avcon adapter anymore, so I couldn't charge there. Fry's hasn't updated their L2 chargers yet, sadly. I saw several Leafs there parked in the EV spots near mine.

I had 1 bar left at that point. I was near Lawrence & 101, about 16 miles away from home . I know that my daily 13 mile commute from Montague & 101 takes 4 kWh and bars 3, 4 and 5 every day at 65 mph due to the uphill at the end. So, I didn't think I could make it home at that point even continuing to drive slowly on 101. I decided I needed to charge. Maybe there would have been enough reserve, but maybe not, but I was with my partner and not willing to chance getting stuck on the freeway and waiting for the Nissan tow truck.

Leg 4 is the trip from Fry's to the Santa Clara library. That is a 4.6 miles detour. By the time I got to the charger I was at LBW, zero bar blinking, 6 miles on GOM, after 65.1 miles of mostly freeway driving. The charger was still free, otherwise I would have been off to Stevens Creek Nissan about a mile away.

Leg 5 is to a store on Lawrence & Homestead. Not sure why the miles/kWh are so low for this leg as this is city driving & flat.

The last leg that's still missing in Carwings is about 15 miles, again mostly freeway, plus the uphill at the end. I expect about 4 to 5 kWh.
 
madbrain said:
By the time I got to the charger I was at LBW, zero bar blinking, 6 miles on GOM, after 65.1 miles of mostly freeway driving.

It's hard to say exactly how much usable energy you had remaining, but we do know that it's between:

3.1kWh (Low Batt Warning)

and

1.3kWh (Very Low Batt... GOM goes to "---")


As I stated to you previously, range is stored usable energy multiplied by economy:

KWh * miles/kWh = Range in miles

If we just estimate and split the difference at 2kWh usable remaining, and it appears that your driving style can achieve 4 miles per kWh, then a very rough guess of remaining range is:

2 * 4 = 8 miles

When climate control is on, it will be reflected in your economy, as will going up and down hills, etc. if you had a Gidmeter, you would know somewhat accurately how much energy remains. The two Low Battery warnings are indexed to that 3.1kWh and 1.3kWh regardless of battery degradation.

The fuel bars, CarWings, and the GOM are not the best tools to use to determine how much range might remain after your 65 mile drive. The next time you are unsure of your remaining range, AND you have already seen the LBW or VLB warning, you'll be ready.

With experience, you will learn to reset one of your trip odometers at LBW, and then assuming you can accurately determine your economy (again, I'll just use 4), you'll know that:

3.1 * 4 = 12.4 miles range remaining, then minus however many miles from the trip meter. If you drove 4.5 miles since you reset it at LBW, then:

12.4 miles minus 4.5 = 7.9 miles remaining. At some point you'll get VLB (with the GOM at "---") at which point you'll be able to do the calculation again (and once again reset your trip meter):

1.3 * 4 = 5.2 miles range remaining. That should be enough to keep you out of trouble. Estimating your economy could take a whole 'nother post or two.
 
DaveinOlyWA said:
how much did you quick charge? (how many Kwh)

How would I get that information ? Is there a way for the Blink charger to tell me the kWh recharged ?

When I plugged in, the screen of the Blink charger said my car reported 0% charge. I thought that couldn't be right because there is some reserve battery after LBW.
But when the charge actually started, it was going up from about 18%. I thought that was a little high.

There was no one around and I set it to charge to 100% and shopping. I got a text 30 mins later that the charge stopped. I came back to the car within 5 minutes. The charger said the car was at 90%, not 100%. I don't know why the charge did not complete to 100%.

I started another session at 100%. It went pretty quickly to 98%, then became slow. I stopped there.
I was surprised to see that my Leaf had only 10 bars. I was expecting 11.

I logged in to Blinknetwork and see that the first session was 30 minutes and 10 seconds.
The second session was 6 minutes 24 seconds.
I called Blink to let them know about the charge interruption.

what was your remaining capacity when you got home? (make sure you clarify how you got this) and what was miles/kwh for the trip?

I don't know what the remaining capacity was when I got home. I don't recall exactly how many bars I had remaining. I didn't make a note of it, probably 7 or 8 bars left.
I can't tell how much was recharged either. My L2 charger at home is a non-networked model.

I looked for a text notification of the end of the end of charge on my cell phone, but it looks like I never got one, so I have no idea when the charge finished. The cell service used by the Leaf is very unreliable on the hill, and works less than half the time. I'm at the edge of the coverage, and when the car is in the garage with the door closed, the coverage is a crapshoot.

I should get the miles/kwh for the last trip tomorow.

on degradation; how often have you seen 7 TB's or more?

What ? I had to lookup what you mean by TB. Can't say I pay much attention to them except after the quick charges. I couldn't tell you how many temperature bars there are, much less if I got seven. But the gauge has never gotten into the red area after any of my quick charges. My car has done a grand total of 10 quick charges according to blinknetwork.com, and that's counting the interrupted charges . I have never quick charged on any other network or at dealers.
 
Tony,

TonyWilliams said:
It's hard to say exactly how much usable energy you had remaining, but we do know that it's between:

3.1kWh (Low Batt Warning)

and

1.3kWh (Very Low Batt... GOM goes to "---")

OK. It's probably closer to the first number, I don't think the LBW had been on very long when I parked at the DC charger.

As I stated to you previously, range is stored usable energy multiplied by economy:

KWh * miles/kWh = Range in miles

Yes, the formula is obvious, what isn't is getting the actual battery capacity left. My 2012 doesn't have a SOC %.
There is no "free kWh" display. And I don't have a gid meter.
I can't exactly predict the miles/kWh either.

If we just estimate and split the difference at 2kWh usable remaining, and it appears that your driving style can achieve 4 miles per kWh, then a very rough guess of remaining range is:

2 * 4 = 8 miles

Based on that, and 15 miles left from the charger to home, I couldn't have made it home from the quick charger location, but that's not a big surprise to me.

What I wonder is if I didn't take the detour to that charger if I could actually have made it home, after trip 3 when I had 1 bar.

When climate control is on, it will be reflected in your economy, as will going up and down hills, etc. if you had a Gidmeter, you would know somewhat accurately how much energy remains. The two Low Battery warnings are indexed to that 3.1kWh and 1.3kWh regardless of battery degradation.

Yes, I know how the climate control affects the economy. A/C is not bad though, unlike the heater. The hills are bad for sure. I don't have a Gidmeter. Even at $5 per avoided quick charge it would be a while before it pays back for itself. It could save time potentially though by avoiding the detour to the charger unnecessarily.

The fuel bars, CarWings, and the GOM are not the best tools to use to determine how much range might remain after your 65 mile drive. The next time you are unsure of your remaining range, AND you have already seen the LBW or VLB warning, you'll be ready.

I know to ignore the GOM. I rely mostly on the fuel bars while driving. Is there any reason to distrust the numbers recorded in Carwings after the fact ? Those don't help while on the road anyway, though.

With experience, you will learn to reset one of your trip odometers at LBW, and then assuming you can accurately determine your economy (again, I'll just use 4), you'll know that:

Thanks for the tip, I hadn't thought of using the trip odometer this way, I haven't used them for months
 
madbrain said:
When I plugged in, the screen of the Blink charger said my car reported 0% charge. I thought that couldn't be right because there is some reserve battery after LBW.
But when the charge actually started, it was going up from about 18%. I thought that was a little high.

There was no one around and I set it to charge to 100% and shopping. I got a text 30 mins later that the charge stopped. I came back to the car within 5 minutes. The charger said the car was at 90%, not 100%. I don't know why the charge did not complete to 100%.
Unless you have a '13 LEAF, the car will stop charging at around 80% when you start a QC from below 50% SOC or so.

madbrain said:
I started another session at 100%. It went pretty quickly to 98%, then became slow. I stopped there.
I was surprised to see that my Leaf had only 10 bars. I was expecting 11.

I logged in to Blinknetwork and see that the first session was 30 minutes and 10 seconds.
The second session was 6 minutes 24 seconds.
I called Blink to let them know about the charge interruption.
Not likely to be Blink's problem - as mentioned earlier, the car generally controls how long the charge will run unless you set the Blink to something besides 100%.
 
madbrain said:
And I don't have a gid meter.
I can't exactly predict the miles/kWh either.

I think there's a new device, "LeafDD", that is less than $100. It will show Gids. If you have an Android device already, you can buy a $15-$20 OBDII Bluetooth device and download a program from Turbo3 (who lives right in your area) and get all the info you need. If you don't have an Android device, you can buy one for as little as $39. There are whole threads devoted to this stuff.

Predicting economy isn't that hard with experience. Just like resetting the trip odometer to determine how far you have traveled from a landmark warning, you can reset the economy (miles/kWh) at the same time. Try doing that a few times and drive your normal routes to learn about what the economy might be.

We already know that 65mph driving on a level roadway without climate control is 4 miles/kWh. By the way, if you're that close to running out of energy, ALWAYS turn off the climate control. It isn't going to be working much longer anyway!! In the aircraft business, we create "flows" for processes, and checklists to verify them. You can probably not use a checklist, since the worst thing that will happen to you is walking in an environment that you will always be able to survive in, but I recommend the muscle/memory "flow" items.

Ding! Low Battery Warning! What do you do? Starting from left to right:


Trip Odometer A/B - SELECT
Trip Mileage - RESET
Economy - SELECT
Economy Mileage - RESET
Climate Control - OFF (except for bursts to defrost, if applicable)
Navigation distance to go - NOTE

Now, drive accordingly to get to your destination, or stop for energy.


What I wonder is if I didn't take the detour to that charger if I could actually have made it home, after trip 3 when I had 1 bar.

Sorry, one bar is an EXTREMELY bad reference for cutting things close. You'll note if you go back through almost two years of talking about this, the landmarks are the fixed energy references of LBW and VLB. If you had reset your trip odometer at LBW, and you could learn to estimate your economy, you will always have a pretty good idea of how much further you can go.

Even at $5 per avoided quick charge it would be a while before it pays back for itself. It could save time potentially though by avoiding the detour to the charger unnecessarily.

You clearly want to push the limits, and it seems saving time is important to you. It seems obvious to me that their is a "pay back" with a Gidmeter or similar device for you.

I know to ignore the GOM. I rely mostly on the fuel bars while driving. Is there any reason to distrust the numbers recorded in Carwings after the fact ? Those don't help while on the road anyway, though.

Historically, CarWings was GROSSLY wrong. So, I never used it. They made changes to improve it, but I've never had a reason to use it even once. Sorry, can't help you there. The LEAF-S doesn't even come with CarWings, and I can't imagine the thrifty folks who buy a LEAF would pay for CarWings when it expires in 3 years.

So, I wouldn't get too reliant on that, even if it were perfect.
 
Nope, when I hit three years in March, it is gone unless it is really dirt cheap! But then, my XM STILL continues to work on trial so I can't complain too much!

TonyWilliams said:
Historically, CarWings was GROSSLY wrong. So, I never used it. They made changes to improve it, but I've never had a reason to use it even once. Sorry, can't help you there. The LEAF-S doesn't even come with CarWings, and I can't imagine the thrifty folks who buy a LEAF would pay for CarWings when it expires in 3 years.
 
Tony,

TonyWilliams said:
I think there's a new device, "LeafDD", that is less than $100. It will show Gids. If you have an Android device already, you can buy a $15-$20 OBDII Bluetooth device and download a program from Turbo3 (who lives right in your area) and get all the info you need. If you don't have an Android device, you can buy one for as little as $39. There are whole threads devoted to this stuff.

I do have an Android device. I will look into buying the OBDII thingy. $15-$20 is definitely worth it.
That is much better than the gidmeters that were a couple hundred dollars last time I looked into it.

Can the Android phone still stay connected to the car via Bluetooth at the same time that the app is running and talking to the OBDII via Bluetooth ?

You clearly want to push the limits, and it seems saving time is important to you. It seems obvious to me that their is a "pay back" with a Gidmeter or similar device for you.

Well, pushing the limits wasn't my goal. I had done a roundtrip from home to San Mateo before in the winter without charging on the way. It did result in VLB. There was no stopover at Fry's though. I thought I might be able to make it without charging in summer weather with that stop, and maybe I could have, but I wanted to play it safe so I stopped for a charge.

Yes, the Gidmeter or equivalent device is worth it at the costs you mentioned.

Historically, CarWings was GROSSLY wrong. So, I never used it. They made changes to improve it, but I've never had a reason to use it even once. Sorry, can't help you there. The LEAF-S doesn't even come with CarWings, and I can't imagine the thrifty folks who buy a LEAF would pay for CarWings when it expires in 3 years.

So, I wouldn't get too reliant on that, even if it were perfect.

I have been analyzing lots of my trips after I did them on Carwings. The miles data for sure is correct.
I can't say for sure if the energy usage data for each trip is correct, but it looks pretty good to me.
 
madbrain said:
The last leg that's still missing in Carwings is about 15 miles, again mostly freeway, plus the uphill at the end. I expect about 4 to 5 kWh.

I got it and the stats for that last leg are 4.4 kWh net usage, 4.9 kWh consumed , 0.5 kWh recharged, 14.4 miles, 3.3 miles/kWh . I was not trying to control speed as I had just quick charged, I might have done a little better if I drove under 65 mph on the freeway.

The total stats for the day from Carwings are 80.8 miles driven, 20.9 kWh net consumption, 3.9 miles/kWh.
A brand new car with zero degradation is supposed to have 21 kWh usable, so it is doubtful that I could have made those same trips without charging,.I would probably have been stuck on the way back home.

Without leg 4 (the detour to the charger), I would have saved 1.1 kWh. Driving slower for the last leg might have saved another 0.5 kWh or so. It would still be a little over 19 kWh . I don't know for sure if my battery still has that much usable capacity when fully charged.
 
drees said:
Unless you have a '13 LEAF, the car will stop charging at around 80% when you start a QC from below 50% SOC or so.

Why would the car itself interrupt the charge before full charge ? It doesn't do that on L1 or L2.
My car definitely had under 50% SOC when I started.
But the Blink DC charger reported that the first charge stopped at 90%, not 80%.

It seems that the car and the Blink charger's idea of the SOC % may be different.

madbrain said:
Not likely to be Blink's problem - as mentioned earlier, the car generally controls how long the charge will run unless you set the Blink to something besides 100%.

In the past, when I have left the Blink charger to 80% (default), it stopped at 80% on the screen.
This was my first time setting the Blink charger to 100%.
 
evnow said:
...Let us look at it differently - how exactly would I use this new info from the lab ?

IMO, the first thing we can conclude, is that it is even more foolish now to try to establish a single “new” available kWh capacity value for a LEAF, than was the case before these results were available.

We already had a lot of evidence that capacity varies with recharge temperature, and the results from the three constant speed tests seem to indicate that even where the recharge temperatures are closely controlled, the recharge capacity the test LEAF’s LBC allowed appeared to have varied by at least ~3%.

The most important new information, IMO, is that I think we can now find the available capacity for the LEAF’s 100 mile EPA rating, and relate it to the constant speed and recharge capacity tests, which I think is very useful.

Since the UDDS (LA4) methodology was replicated in the baseline dynamometer test, resulting in 90.2 miles of range, and this testing criteria Is designed to be constant for available battery capacity, I believe we should be able to use the same ratio to determine ranges from the (close to) constant average kW use from the constant speed tests.

And since the 60 mph constant speed test (for example) resulted in 65.3 miles range, I believe we may tentatively conclude that a “new” 2011 (as defined by one allowing the same available battery capacity shown by the EPA 100 mile rating) should get ~72.4 miles, (+/_ at least ~3%, due to variable LBC operation) of range, if you are able to accurately replicate all the test conditions.

That 72.4 mile range, BTW, looks to be well within the range that Nissan says it should be, if your trip computer actually accurately displayed the ~3.7 m/kWh that the 60 mph test did show.

http://mynissanleaf.com/wiki/index.php?title=File:NTB11-076a.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

And corresponds quite closely to the highway range performance Nissan promises, both on their website and in the sale/lease battery disclosure:

Highway driving in the summer: 112km (70 miles)
Speed: Average 88km/h (55 mph)
Temperature: 35 degrees Celsius (95 degrees Fahrenheit)
Climate control: On

Though we do not know exactly how much the lower speed and higher ambient and battery temperatures should increase the range, as opposed to the range decrease due to the AC use in this example.

http://www.nissan.ca/vehicles/ms/leaf/en/range-fundamentals.aspx#/range-fundamentals" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


So you could try to run your own constant speed range test, at any of the three test speeds, to assess your own battery capacity compared with 100 mile LA4.

Remember however, that neither a range test or a recharge test will determine your batteries level of “degradation”. They can only show you the level of battery capacity your LEAF is allowing you to access, out of the total capacity, as compared to that capacity level allowed the LEAFs the EPA used in it’s testing to get the 100 mile L4 rating.

And you may find attempting a constant-speed range test may not be the best use of your time and energy.

We have numerous examples on MNL of amateur attempts to get accurate constant-speed range test/capacity results, but failing, due to their inability to understand and adequately control all relevant test variables. If you want to give it a try, at least you now have an accurate reference test for comparison, and a 29 page checklist of methodology you can attempt to replicate, to the best of your ability. Good luck!

I believe you may find that you actually may be able to get more accurate (or at least less inaccurate) capacity results with your own L2 timed recharge tests, compared to the results published from LEAF 0356.

And probably more accurate than either, would be establishing your dash or nav screen m/kWh error rate, by using Carwings and replicating one of the m/kWh test conditions from 0356 over a practical test distance, to find the common error in your m/kWh displays and CarWings kWh use data, and so find the actual kWh use and available battery capacity of your LEAF.

madbrain said:
...The total stats for the day from Carwings are 80.8 miles driven, 20.9 kWh net consumption, 3.9 miles/kWh.
A brand new car with zero degradation is supposed to have 21 kWh usable...

You might want to go to the thread links I posted on Friday on page 3 for more suggestions on using your CW kWh use data.
 
edatoakrun said:
And you may find attempting a constant-speed range test may not be the best use of your time and energy.

We have numerous examples on MNL of amateur attempts to get accurate constant-speed range test/capacity results, but failing, due to their inability to understand and adequately control all relevant test variables.


The guy with "all the answers" is also this guy:



edatoakrun said:
I thought the test results below might be worth a new thread since, AFAIK, these results have not been posted on MNL before, and no reputable test prior to this has correlated range....

I was never tempted to go to the extreme inconvenience those tests would entail...
 
edatoakrun said:
evnow said:
...Let us look at it differently - how exactly would I use this new info from the lab ?

IMO, the first thing we can conclude, is that it is even more foolish now to try to establish a single “new” available kWh capacity value for a LEAF, than was the case before these results were available.

We already had a lot of evidence that capacity varies with recharge temperature, and the results from the three constant speed tests seem to indicate that even where the recharge temperatures are closely controlled, the recharge capacity the test LEAF’s LBC allowed appeared to have varied by at least ~3%.
3% variation hardly makes the effort to find the useable capacity foolish.

What I ultimately want to find out is - how many miles can I go if I'm getting, say 5.0 m/kWh on the dash. That is a question these lab results don't answer. So while the lab results are very interesting - they don't replace the non-lab tests others have conducted.

Anyway, I just wish the lab noted the dash m/kWh, it would have been so much more useful or atleast enlightening.

I was trying to find out the contact of the author/authors. I couldn't in the paper - if we can, then I'd like to contact them to see if they noted that information.
 
Back
Top