How long 'til 4th bar drops?

[cwerdna]

When I bought my LEAF in 2011...
with a 5-year warranty on the battery maintaining "approximately 70% of battery capacity", I should be covered, right?

...
As my car approached the 5-year expiration date, with 22,000 miles on the odometer, the car was charging to approx. 62 miles - well short of 70% of its original 102-mile range.
...

After purchasing the Leaf Spy app (which plugs directly into the car's maintenance port) I discovered the car had 64.8% of battery capacity remaining (182 GIDs). So I went back to Nissan Service and showed them their bar display was wrong - remaining capacity was well below 70% - and demanded the new $5,500 battery to which I was entitled. "But it's not below 9 bars," I was told. So I demanded to talk to the Service Manager. "But it's not below 9 bars," he said.

In two consecutive calls to Nissan America Customer Service I tried to explain. "Because your 'bars' don't correspond to any physical property they're useless to consumers for evaluation purposes," I said. "I purchased the car based on the battery's capacity not falling 'below approximately 70%' of original capacity." Both times I was told, "But it's not below 9 bars."

Original EPA range rating of '11 and '12 Leaf was 73 miles. See https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do ... s&id=30979. Guess-o-meter values are worthless.

Yes, the way the capacity warranty is warranted is in bars (http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=13192). Full stop.

As for battery gids or SOH or whatever, Nissan has never released any public documentation on those along w/any caveats (e.g. conditions required for the readings to be accurate, how many watt-hours each gid can represent, etc.) See posts like these from the Leaf Spy auithor: http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.p ... 44#p516444 and http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.p ... 73#p521773.

It needs to be below 9 bars before expiration, otherwise they'll tell you to pound sand.

Regarding the last bolded part, when you bought the car in 2011, there was NO warranty at all for gradual capacity loss.

[EVadvocate]

Regarding the last bolded part, when you bought the car in 2011, there was NO warranty at all for gradual capacity loss.

Thanks cwerdna, you're correct - there was no warranty at all for gradual capacity loss when I bought the car. Yet when I bought the car it had 102 miles of range on a full charge, and Nissan promised me in their "expanded warranty coverage" that

"...the lithium-ion battery for your 2011 or 2012 Nissan LEAF is now also warranted against capacity loss below nine (9) bars (or approximately below 70 percent) as shown on the vehicle’s battery capacity level gauge..."

Do the math yourself - they lied. I was informed of Nissan's warranty-after-the-fact in the same letter which told me to go in and get my operating system "updated" - aka, tweaked to add display miles, without a watthour of additional capacity in the battery - which I guess I'm supposed to find comforting.

I might find out years from now the digits on the speedometer don't correspond to the speed I'm traveling, and the miles on the odometer tick off slower than the actual distance I've traveled, but I don't expect to have the car that long. I'm looking to dump it as soon as possible for a new model from a reputable manufacturer - too many other options. Full Stop.

[sandeen]

Thanks cwerdna, you're correct - there was no warranty at all for gradual capacity loss when I bought the car. Yet when I bought the car it had 102 miles of range on a full charge, and Nissan promised me in their "expanded warranty coverage" that

"...the lithium-ion battery for your 2011 or 2012 Nissan LEAF is now also warranted against capacity loss below nine (9) bars (or approximately below 70 percent) as shown on the vehicle’s battery capacity level gauge..."

Do the math yourself - they lied.

I really don't see where you get that. A lot of people are upset that they didn't meet the warranty terms, but the warranty terms are clear; you left out a little bit above (the time) period, i.e.

…Nissan LEAF®Lithium-ion battery is also warranted against capacity loss below nine bars of capacity as shown on the vehicle’s battery capacity level gauge for a period of 60 months or 60,000 miles with the 24kWh battery and 96 months or 100,000 miles with the 30kWh battery, whichever comes first…

The only definitive language is "9 bars" and "60 months/60,000 miles." "approximately below 70 percent" is wiggly. good luck arguing over the meaning of "approximately." (That and $6k out of pocket will certainly get you a new battery pack.)

You can dislike the warranty terms, but they're not lying about anything; you're simply out of the warranty. I had a transmission go bad on a Honda out of warranty and they also told me to pound sand even though that model year had known issues with the transmission.

[EVadvocate]

I really don't see where you get that. A lot of people are upset that they didn't meet the warranty terms, but the warranty terms are clear; you left out a little bit above (the time) period, i.e....

I didn't leave anything out Sandeen, those are the exact words they used in my Expanded Warranty Coverage. Interesting, however, that they have now deleted "or approximately below 70% percent" - almost as if they understand it could be misleading. Actually, very much that way.

What if your 4-year-old battery could only retain 25% of its original capacity, but the display still read 9 bars - you still wouldn't be entitled to a new battery, right? What about 10%? Where would you draw the line?

[sandeen]

What if your 4-year-old battery could only retain 25% of its original capacity, but the display still read 9 bars - you still wouldn't be entitled to a new battery, right? What about 10%? Where would you draw the line?

Per the warranty terms, you draw the line at 9 bars. Unfair? Yep maybe so. As specified and enforceable in the warranty? Yup, for sure. There is no other reliable/documented/official method of obtaining battery health information.

If you had a Ford with a component out of warranty past 50,000 miles on the odometer reading and you tried to argue that you had smaller tires so you hit 50,000 way too soon they'd say sorry, no. The warranty specifies the odometer reading, and don't get to argue that it's not accurate or reflective of reality, because that's immaterial as per the warranty terms. They have to draw the line somewhere, and some people will land on the other side of it.

[cwerdna]

"Bay Area" covers an awful lot of microclimates. One of the local TV forecasters occasionally puts up a graphic showing a 30, 40 and even occasionally a 50 deg. temperature delta over a 35 mile distance, from say Pacifica (coastal fog) to Dublin or Livermore (inland valley heat).

Yep.

http://mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=331394#p331394

As I posted at http://mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=300216#p300216 in June 2013:
"Today was an illustration of the extreme variance in temps in the Bay Area, probably more so than usual for summer... err spring.

It was pretty darn hot in my part of SJ. News said the city of SJ was 95, but my part gets hotter, I wouldn't be surprised if it got to 97 or 99. Anyhow, today it was 111 F in Dublin, 107 in Livermore, 105 in Walnut Creek but only 62 (!!!) in SF and 67 in Santa Cruz. Other temps for the day: Pacifica at 69, Half Moon Bay at 61 and Bodega Bay at 60."

To add to this, it's not even summer yet, but on the channel 7 11 pm news for 5/18/16, here are some sample high temps for the day:
Half Moon Bay: 64 F
Richmond: 67 F
Santa Cruz: 70 F
San Francisco: 70 F
Oakland: 76 F
Gilroy: 87 F
San Jose: 88 F
Concord: 95 F
Antioch: 100 F

To followup on the Bay Area microclimates, here are some high temps that local KTVU news listed today:
Pacifica 55 F
Ocean Beach (in SF) 58 F
SF 61 F
Hayward 71 F
Oakland 73 F
Redwood City 77 F
Fremont 79 F
San Jose 80 F
Livermore 92 F
Walnut Creek 95 F
Concord 97 F
Morgan Hill 97 F
Antioch 100 F

Pacifica to Walnut Creek is only 38 miles by car but to Antioch, it's 58 miles.

[jtselkain]

Today 11.11.2018 I have 8 bars left in my 2011 Nissan Leaf. The car is more than seven years old and it is 72.667 km driven. There was 9 bars left 15.4.2017 with 60.811 km.

[cwerdna]

I'm surprised this thread's been inactive for about 2.5 years now.

Yep.

http://mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=331394#p331394

As I posted at http://mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=300216#p300216 in June 2013:
"Today was an illustration of the extreme variance in temps in the Bay Area, probably more so than usual for summer... err spring.

It was pretty darn hot in my part of SJ. News said the city of SJ was 95, but my part gets hotter, I wouldn't be surprised if it got to 97 or 99. Anyhow, today it was 111 F in Dublin, 107 in Livermore, 105 in Walnut Creek but only 62 (!!!) in SF and 67 in Santa Cruz. Other temps for the day: Pacifica at 69, Half Moon Bay at 61 and Bodega Bay at 60."

To add to this, it's not even summer yet, but on the channel 7 11 pm news for 5/18/16, here are some sample high temps for the day:
Half Moon Bay: 64 F
Richmond: 67 F
Santa Cruz: 70 F
San Francisco: 70 F
Oakland: 76 F
Gilroy: 87 F
San Jose: 88 F
Concord: 95 F
Antioch: 100 F

To followup on the Bay Area microclimates, here are some high temps that local KTVU news listed today:
Pacifica 55 F
Ocean Beach (in SF) 58 F
SF 61 F
Hayward 71 F
Oakland 73 F
Redwood City 77 F
Fremont 79 F
San Jose 80 F
Livermore 92 F
Walnut Creek 95 F
Concord 97 F
Morgan Hill 97 F
Antioch 100 F

Pacifica to Walnut Creek is only 38 miles by car but to Antioch, it's 58 miles.

To add to the variance on SF Bay Area temps on what was a very hot Thursday, here are some high temps from that day per local ABC 7 news:
Half Moon Bay 67 F
San Francisco 80 F <-- quite high for them
Oakland 90 F
Santa Cruz 90 F <-- quite high for them
San Jose 95 F
Redwood City 103 F <-- weird
Gilroy 106 F
Concord 107 F
Livermore 107 F
Fairfield 110 F

Half Moon Bay and Redwood City are under 17 miles apart via the shortest path by car.

Concord and Livermore normally get quite hot in the summer.

[DaveinOlyWA]

I'm surprised this thread's been inactive for about 2.5 years now.

To add to this, it's not even summer yet, but on the channel 7 11 pm news for 5/18/16, here are some sample high temps for the day:
Half Moon Bay: 64 F
Richmond: 67 F
Santa Cruz: 70 F
San Francisco: 70 F
Oakland: 76 F
Gilroy: 87 F
San Jose: 88 F
Concord: 95 F
Antioch: 100 F

To followup on the Bay Area microclimates, here are some high temps that local KTVU news listed today:
Pacifica 55 F
Ocean Beach (in SF) 58 F
SF 61 F
Hayward 71 F
Oakland 73 F
Redwood City 77 F
Fremont 79 F
San Jose 80 F
Livermore 92 F
Walnut Creek 95 F
Concord 97 F
Morgan Hill 97 F
Antioch 100 F

Pacifica to Walnut Creek is only 38 miles by car but to Antioch, it's 58 miles.

To add to the variance on SF Bay Area temps on what was a very hot Thursday, here are some high temps from that day per local ABC 7 news:
Half Moon Bay 67 F
San Francisco 80 F <-- quite high for them
Oakland 90 F
Santa Cruz 90 F <-- quite high for them
San Jose 95 F
Redwood City 103 F <-- weird
Gilroy 106 F
Concord 107 F
Livermore 107 F
Fairfield 110 F

Half Moon Bay and Redwood City are under 17 miles apart via the shortest path by car.

Concord and Livermore normally get quite hot in the summer.

Lived in San Jose (Milpitas actually) and worked in Redwood City. Weird that RC is hotter? Usually its the other way around and not even close most of the time

[DaveinOlyWA]

I'm surprised this thread's been inactive for about 2.5 years now.

To add to this, it's not even summer yet, but on the channel 7 11 pm news for 5/18/16, here are some sample high temps for the day:
Half Moon Bay: 64 F
Richmond: 67 F
Santa Cruz: 70 F
San Francisco: 70 F
Oakland: 76 F
Gilroy: 87 F
San Jose: 88 F
Concord: 95 F
Antioch: 100 F

To followup on the Bay Area microclimates, here are some high temps that local KTVU news listed today:
Pacifica 55 F
Ocean Beach (in SF) 58 F
SF 61 F
Hayward 71 F
Oakland 73 F
Redwood City 77 F
Fremont 79 F
San Jose 80 F
Livermore 92 F
Walnut Creek 95 F
Concord 97 F
Morgan Hill 97 F
Antioch 100 F

Pacifica to Walnut Creek is only 38 miles by car but to Antioch, it's 58 miles.

To add to the variance on SF Bay Area temps on what was a very hot Thursday, here are some high temps from that day per local ABC 7 news:
Half Moon Bay 67 F
San Francisco 80 F <-- quite high for them
Oakland 90 F
Santa Cruz 90 F <-- quite high for them
San Jose 95 F
Redwood City 103 F <-- weird
Gilroy 106 F
Concord 107 F
Livermore 107 F
Fairfield 110 F

Half Moon Bay and Redwood City are under 17 miles apart via the shortest path by car.

Concord and Livermore normally get quite hot in the summer.

Lived in San Jose (Milpitas actually) and worked in Redwood City. Weird that RC is hotter? Usually its the other way around and not even close most of the time