Conditioning Your Battery / Keeping as Healthy as Possible

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.
In late 2017, I bought a 12 bar 2015 Leaf S. It was just off a one owner, three year lease. I am looking at the LeafSpy screenshot I took soon after I bought it.

28,950 miles
SOH - 95%
HX - 91.52%
369 Quick charges
593 L1/L2 charges.

With all the talk of battery heat and avoiding Quick Charges, how do you explain the health of this battery after three years? I kept it for 6 months before selling it and buying a new 2018. The GOM range always showed in the mid 90's to 100 after a full charge.
 
mkwilkes said:
In late 2017, I bought a 12 bar 2015 Leaf S. It was just off a one owner, three year lease. I am looking at the LeafSpy screenshot I took soon after I bought it.

28,950 miles
SOH - 95%
HX - 91.52%
369 Quick charges
593 L1/L2 charges.

With all the talk of battery heat and avoiding Quick Charges, how do you explain the health of this battery after three years? I kept it for 6 months before selling it and buying a new 2018. The GOM range always showed in the mid 90's to 100 after a full charge.

QC sessions only need to be avoided when the pack is hot, not entirely, and the 2015 pack is the most heat-resistant of them all.
 
there is no line crossed at 81%. Only charge to what you need which includes a buffer. 20% is fine. 19% is fine. 21% is fine.

I guess my question could have been phrased more clearly. What I'm really asking is: whatever you do on a regular basis to try and slow down long-term capacity loss - keep the battery between 80% and 20%, keep the battery between 60% and 20%, straddle 50%, charge daily to ensure the lowest possible DoD, etc. - which SOC should you go by when doing this, the dash or Leaf Spy?
 
Kieran973 said:
there is no line crossed at 81%. Only charge to what you need which includes a buffer. 20% is fine. 19% is fine. 21% is fine.

I guess my question could have been phrased more clearly. What I'm really asking is: whatever you do on a regular basis to try and slow down long-term capacity loss - keep the battery between 80% and 20%, keep the battery between 60% and 20%, straddle 50%, charge daily to ensure the lowest possible DoD, etc. - which SOC should you go by when doing this, the dash or Leaf Spy?


First off; you need to evaluate your needs and willingness to charge publicly.

The ideal situation is to straddle 50%. Avoid "any" time at the extremes (under 10% or over 90%) but again, no line here. If you are taking a trip, the convenience of a full charge far outweighs the slightly greater degradation you get from it. Degradation is not avoidable so it is all about balancing needs.

The only real red flags are high SOC AND heat. That is the worst situation. Now fast charging on a hot day but immediately driving away is probably better than charging at home then letting it sit a few hours before going anywhere. Its the time at high SOC that is the killer. Heat makes it worse.

With public charging, some are free, some are cheap and some are expensive. You want to know ALL your options on your routes. Plugshare.com is a good place to start.

If you are not into public charging, then get LEAF Spy. It allows you to know exactly how far you can drive. LEAF Spy is dirt cheap when compared to the stress LEAF instrumentation causes.

The following is personal opinion somewhat based on experience. I am ok with taking LEAF down to the last 5% SOC pulling into my garage. My 2013 probably came home under 15 GID maybe...100 times, maybe more than that. If that happens, no worries, plug in for an hour soon as you get home.

Each LEAF pack has acted differently (2011 and 2013 were close to the same) for me but my best pack by a HUGE margin was my 2016. Part of it was due to short period of time (14 months) but negating the miles driven (29,413) or QCs (275) the only real difference was it was first LEAF that had NCTC so I kinda went crazy on the free charging. My job helped as well but I was literally fast charging 2-4 times a day in Summer, getting home at 20-50% SOC and 10 (sometimes 11 temperature bars) The next morning, I would hit the QC and start my rounds for the day. This lasted 6 weeks while servicing a client who had 65 clinics in the region that was spread thru out the Olympic Peninsula down to Oregon. It was the perfect LEAF job as I had 15-45 mins of paperwork between each job and some days had as many as 12 jobs scheduled. So yeah, long hours but my charge time was being billed to the company since I was working. It was lucrative.

Anyway, 3 days before the 2016 was wrecked, I went 116.2 miles on a charge in January. This pretty much illustrated that I had "minimal" capacity loss. But the major change was much less full charges and a LOT of living in the middle. My charge time frequently was based on how long it took to do paperwork. Realize I was doing 14-25 hour days so sitting around was not an option. So it was a lot of plug and run which meant cycling from 20 to 70-85% several times a day.

TBT; I didn't charge overnight a lot of times due to having 11 temperature bars. I felt it better to let it cool off overnight and then grab a charge in the morning.
 
OK, still not what I'm asking though. What I'm asking is this: when you make charging decisions with the goal of protecting the long-term health of your battery - "I avoid charging higher than x, I avoid discharging lower than y, because I believe this is the best way to slow capacity degradation" - which SOC informs those decisions? The one displayed on the dash? Or the one reported by Leaf Spy? This question goes for anyone on MNL.
 
I'll give it a try. It's better to use the car's display because that is what the collective experiences of charging behavior here are based on. OTOH, 80% should be considered a maximum safe SOC for sitting unused, with 60-70% being better and also corresponding with a lower SOC as indicated by LeafSpy.
 
Those distinctions do not matter.

Keep between 20 - 80% SoC as much as you can. Use the LEAF meter for convenience.
Spend more time and effort in keeping the car battery cooler in the summer.
 
It's better to use the car's display because that is what the collective experiences of charging behavior here are based on.

OK thanks, sounds reasonable enough.


Those distinctions do not matter.

When I charge to 80% SOC on the dash, Leaf Spy says I have almost 90% SOC. So if the distinction between the dash and Leaf Spy doesn't matter, then wouldn't the distinction between 80% and 90% not matter? If so, why is 80% the max recommended threshold? Why not 90%? I agree that it's a lot more convenient to just use the dash than to take a Leaf Spy reading every time I plug in, but if Leaf Spy is the real (or more real) SOC, and 80% is the max recommended threshold for daily use, and I know that the dash will report an SOC around 8-10% less than Leaf Spy, then it seems like a better daily practice would be to not go above 70-72% dash SOC.
 
When I charge to 80% SOC on the dash, Leaf Spy says I have almost 90% SOC. So if the distinction between the dash and Leaf Spy doesn't matter, then wouldn't the distinction between 80% and 90% not matter? If so, why is 80% the max recommended threshold? Why not 90%? I agree that it's a lot more convenient to just use the dash than to take a Leaf Spy reading every time I plug in, but if Leaf Spy is the real (or more real) SOC, and 80% is the max recommended threshold for daily use, and I know that the dash will report an SOC around 8-10% less than Leaf Spy, then it seems like a better daily practice would be to not go above 70-72% dash SOC.

Yes. Even though my Leaf is currently sitting with 90% indicated SOC (I forgot it was plugged in!) I generally try to stay in the 60-70% SOC range. Ambient or pack temps affect how urgent this is, though, so I'm willing to leave it at 90% for a day or so until I need to drive again, because it is currently quite cool here for May.
 
Kieran973 said:
It's better to use the car's display because that is what the collective experiences of charging behavior here are based on.

OK thanks, sounds reasonable enough.


Those distinctions do not matter.

When I charge to 80% SOC on the dash, Leaf Spy says I have almost 90% SOC. So if the distinction between the dash and Leaf Spy doesn't matter, then wouldn't the distinction between 80% and 90% not matter? If so, why is 80% the max recommended threshold? Why not 90%? I agree that it's a lot more convenient to just use the dash than to take a Leaf Spy reading every time I plug in, but if Leaf Spy is the real (or more real) SOC, and 80% is the max recommended threshold for daily use, and I know that the dash will report an SOC around 8-10% less than Leaf Spy, then it seems like a better daily practice would be to not go above 70-72% dash SOC.

This is getting into the realm of splitting hairs, I think. I don't think anyone has quantified the difference between long-term use of 80% charging vs. 90% charging. I don't imagine it's very significant. My 2015 battery is vastly better than my 2012 battery even though the 2012 was regularly charged to 80% via the built-in setting, and the 2015 has almost exclusively charged to 100%. The babied 2012 lost a bar before 3 years, while the 2015 has all 12 bars approaching 5 years, with my "worst-case" charging habits.

Under-charging WILL help extend battery longevity, if you have the inclination to practice it. But I wouldn't obsess over it too much.
 
Kieran973 said:
When I charge to 80% SOC on the dash, Leaf Spy says I have almost 90% SOC. So if the distinction between the dash and Leaf Spy doesn't matter, then wouldn't the distinction between 80% and 90% not matter? If so, why is 80% the max recommended threshold? Why not 90%? I agree that it's a lot more convenient to just use the dash than to take a Leaf Spy reading every time I plug in, but if Leaf Spy is the real (or more real) SOC, and 80% is the max recommended threshold for daily use, and I know that the dash will report an SOC around 8-10% less than Leaf Spy, then it seems like a better daily practice would be to not go above 70-72% dash SOC.
There is not a line in the sand where SoC + 0.00001 is "bad" and SoC - 0.00001 is "good."

The key point you have to understand is that for a car being used most days, battery degradation will occur at about the same rate whether you charge up to 60, 70, 80 or 90% SoC as an isolated variable. The more important (by far) intervention is to minimize the time the battery sits at its peak charge. This is all the more true the higher the battery temperature.

Bottom line: charge after midnight for morning use. Avoid 100% charging when possible, particularly in the summer.
Avoid stuffing the car in a hot, closed garage.
During hot and sunny days, avoid parking the car on hot asphalt and letting it cook there. Walk for shade
 
Nubo said:
This is getting into the realm of splitting hairs, I think. I don't think anyone has quantified the difference between long-term use of 80% charging vs. 90% charging. I don't imagine it's very significant. My 2015 battery is vastly better than my 2012 battery even though the 2012 was regularly charged to 80% via the built-in setting, and the 2015 has almost exclusively charged to 100%. The babied 2012 lost a bar before 3 years, while the 2015 has all 12 bars approaching 5 years, with my "worst-case" charging habits.

Under-charging WILL help extend battery longevity, if you have the inclination to practice it. But I wouldn't obsess over it too much.

Significance must be defined by relevance. Every second a condition exists increases the significance. People will read your statement to mean that its ok when its not. The major issue with EVers is mixed messages creating confusion combined with less than ideal answers to these charge management questions.

Science has already answered the questions of significance. Our only job is weighing the ramifications of our actions verses the role the vehicle needs to play in our lives. Your "my car does fine" has no place in this discussion simply because "fine" is undefined. We all know the 2015 battery is better but does everyone know that? They only see what they understand and that is "it doesn't matter if I charge to 80% because it didn't help so Nissan removed that setting because it was a bad idea"

TBT; Our #1 flaw by a million miles is our unwillingness to "split hairs"

Half the people in the EV World don't know the difference between KW and KWH and frankly don't care.

That is pathetic.
 
DaveinOlyWA said:
Nubo said:
This is getting into the realm of splitting hairs, I think. I don't think anyone has quantified the difference between long-term use of 80% charging vs. 90% charging. I don't imagine it's very significant. My 2015 battery is vastly better than my 2012 battery even though the 2012 was regularly charged to 80% via the built-in setting, and the 2015 has almost exclusively charged to 100%. The babied 2012 lost a bar before 3 years, while the 2015 has all 12 bars approaching 5 years, with my "worst-case" charging habits.

Under-charging WILL help extend battery longevity, if you have the inclination to practice it. But I wouldn't obsess over it too much.

Significance must be defined by relativity. Every second a condition exists increases the significance. People will read your statement to mean that its ok when its not.
Whether it’s “ok” is the thing that’s relative. I’ll give the poster credit for being able to make that determination. I only offer my opinion of the magnitude involved.

The major issue with EVers is mixed messages creating confusion combined with less than ideal answers to these charge management questions.

Science has already answered the questions of significance. Our only job is weighing the ramifications of our actions verses the role the vehicle needs to play in our lives.
Pretty much my point.
Your "my car does fine" has no place in this discussion simply because "fine" is undefined. We all know the 2015 battery is better but does everyone know that? They only see what they understand and that is "it doesn't matter if I charge to 80% because it didn't help so Nissan removed that setting because it was a bad idea"
I give the poster more credit as to what they’re capable of understanding. I’m not trying to write a complete treatise on battery management in a post. If the poster wants and needs that level of detail then obviously they need to do a lot more reading.
TBT; Our #1 flaw by a million miles is our unwillingness to "split hairs"
I determine which hairs I need to split. So do you and so can the poster. Again give them more credit. No need to infantilize them. I assume we’re all reasonably intelligent adults here
 
DaveinOlyWA said:
Significance must be defined by relativity.
Is that some new-age gibberish ?

In science significance is a probability threshold set to exclude a finding due to random variation. In and of itself, nothing is said about the *magnitude* of the finding.
 
Single data point here.
2015 LeafS, DFW region (May-October HOT).
Routine DAILY charging to 100%, rarely drive below 40 (GOM).
Lost my first bar a 27k miles.
Now at 31k miles, GOM routinely shows 83-85 after full charge. Recently drove 71 miles, with A/C, showed 11 miles remaining. (86f ambient)
My wife suffers from "range anxiety", refuses to limit charge to 80-90%. We plug it in daily, car sits outdoors.
No disappointment here, except...except...I'd prefer a VW eGolf...HAHA!
 
SageBrush said:
DaveinOlyWA said:
Significance must be defined by relativity.
Is that some new-age gibberish ?

In science significance is a probability threshold set to exclude a finding due to random variation. In and of itself, nothing is said about the *magnitude* of the finding.

:lol: umm, thinking something lost in translation. I think that should have been "relevance"
 
DaveinOlyWA said:
SageBrush said:
DaveinOlyWA said:
Significance must be defined by relativity.
Is that some new-age gibberish ?

In science significance is a probability threshold set to exclude a finding due to random variation. In and of itself, nothing is said about the *magnitude* of the finding.

:lol: umm, thinking something lost in translation. I think that should have been "relevance"
Ahh, now I understand your intent.

Best not to redefine significance though, no more than one should redefine arithmetic.
I certainly agree that a significant finding may matter a lot to a person, not at all, or something in between.
 
SageBrush said:
DaveinOlyWA said:
SageBrush said:
Is that some new-age gibberish ?

In science significance is a probability threshold set to exclude a finding due to random variation. In and of itself, nothing is said about the *magnitude* of the finding.

:lol: umm, thinking something lost in translation. I think that should have been "relevance"
Ahh, now I understand your intent.

Best not to redefine significance though, no more than one should redefine arithmetic.
I certainly agree that a significant finding may matter a lot to a person, not at all, or something in between.

Normally I would agree but the trend here and elsewhere is simply some people don't care. They know that high SOC is not good but rather have 30-40 miles on the GOM when they get home in the evening and too many base it on statements like "don't fully charge it and let it sit more than 24 hours" or some crap. But those statements are giving some the wrong impression of right and less right.

I get that the difference between letting it sit 2 hours verses 5 hours is VERY small but making these statements more clear only benefits the people who want to know what matters while the people who don't care likely wouldn't notice anyway.

I am a fan of pushing the bottom end and who knows? That might be worse although I think its marginally better. Now I don't come home with 7 GIDs nearly every day like I used to but I am ok with parking it at 20% overnight if no big trips or super early trips are planned the next day. I just plug in a few hours after I get up to boost into the mid ranges.
 
DaveinOlyWA said:
SageBrush said:
DaveinOlyWA said:
:lol: umm, thinking something lost in translation. I think that should have been "relevance"
Ahh, now I understand your intent.

Best not to redefine significance though, no more than one should redefine arithmetic.
I certainly agree that a significant finding may matter a lot to a person, not at all, or something in between.

Normally I would agree but the trend here and elsewhere is simply some people don't care.
The ONLY point I wish to make here is that a statistical declaration of a significant finding says NOTHING about the magnitude of the finding. It could mean that your recommendations extend battery life by one minute or a decade.

Perhaps an example would help:
You could e.g. declare that in your experience of 4 cars, reducing the time that a LEAF sits at 100F or higher extends the battery life by 2 years compared to some presumed outcome. You might say further (if true) that stat analysis of your group of 4 cars is that your findings are significant; that is, unlikely to be due to vagaries of random sampling.

Or perhaps the extended battery life worked out to 2 seconds. The significance analysis remains the same.

Clear ? Significance says NOTHING about the magnitude of the effect.
 
Hi. I’ve spent about two hours this morning reading about Leaf charging and Li ion batteries. A lot of posts and information out there is years old and technologies improve.

My Leaf Plus manual had no recommendations about SOC range.

We bought our Leaf+ in April or May of 2019 when the 62 kWh batteries were still new but I’m not clear whether the technology changes much. And the last post in this thread is from May 2019.

So...my understanding is that the common wisdom from informed knowledge is that, as driving needs allow, it is better to keep SOC between roughly 20% and 80% and not fully discharge or charge to 100%.

And .... that applies also to the Leaf Plus 62 kWh battery...is that right?

Thanks.
 
Back
Top