105+ mile range

[Nubo]

I'll see your paltry 145 and raise you to 888,000 miles! (k-miles)

-Phil

I like how it's using and generating power at the same time. You must have mounted a windmill to the hood! :lol:

 

[BrainDonor]

I like how it's using and generating power at the same time. You must have mounted a windmill to the hood! :lol:

And the battery must be on fire (12 bars) after going that fast (188 mph)...

 

[ebill3]

Maybe some day the computer will be able to figure in altitude changes, traffic, wind, weather, and the phase of the moon and come up with a more accurate prediction. Currently, the algorithm seems to be a bit primitive.

And wouldn't it be nice if the NAV system would consider elevation changes. That is, look at a couple of routes, with and without major elevation changes, and then report which uses less energy. The user could then opt for the shorter, or the cheapest energy wise, or whatever.

Bill

 

[TonyWilliams]

Maybe some day the computer will be able to figure in altitude changes, traffic, wind, weather, and the phase of the moon and come up with a more accurate prediction. Currently, the algorithm seems to be a bit primitive.

And wouldn't it be nice if the NAV system would consider elevation changes. That is, look at a couple of routes, with and without major elevation changes, and then report which uses less energy. The user could then opt for the shorter, or the cheapest energy wise, or whatever.

Bill

I personally spent a bit of time with the engineers from Japan on the elevation issue, and they are working on it. Whether we'll see it in a LEAF type car is probably not on the near term horizon.

 

[N1ghtrider]

My latest 105 mile-plus achievement took me 4 days, commuting 10 miles each way to work and then with various errands througout the week. I am not going to plug in the charger when I have several bars left unless I have a long trip planned for the next day.

This 105 miles was mostly on city streets in Miami, with about 20 miles on I-95 at 55 mph or less (due to traffic), in temps of 73-78 with climate control only on for about 30 miles. Elevations are flat, but I do have a hard time finding parking in my garage at work below level 6, so that should could as a climb.

 

[TomT]

Why? I always plug in and charge to 80 percent just in case... Battery life is based on cumulative full cycles so it is not extending your battery life much, if at all...

My latest 105 mile-plus achievement took me 4 days, commuting 10 miles each way to work and then with various errands througout the week. I am not going to plug in the charger when I have several bars left unless I have a long trip planned for the next day.

 

[TonyWilliams]

Why? I always plug in and charge to 80 percent just in case... Battery life is based on cumulative full cycles so it is not extending your battery life much, if at all...

My latest 105 mile-plus achievement took me 4 days, commuting 10 miles each way to work and then with various errands througout the week. I am not going to plug in the charger when I have several bars left unless I have a long trip planned for the next day.

I'd say keeping the battery as close to 50% might be the best option for longest life, particularly in hot climates. Personally, I just charge to 100% now, 100% of the time, unless the car will sit. Then, I can turn on the Climate Control to bring the battery down to 50% for storage.

 

[N1ghtrider]

Having leased my Leaf I hope that battery life is not an issue for me. I just like the convenience of not plugging in the car until I need more juice. My garage is a little crowded and the L2 cord barely reaches out into the driveway.

 

[Roadburner440]

I will just be charging to 80% like Nissan recommends. We got everywhere we needed to go in Norfolk with more than enough battery capacity at 100%, so I see no reason other than a larger round town journey to charge to 100%. It is good to see no noticeable effects though for those charging to 100%. I too will be leasing the car, but I am leaning toward keeping it at the end so I want to take the best car of it that I can.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

other than various experiments with range and monitoring, i only charge to 100% 4-5 times a month.

last week, i went 6 days without charging at home due to purposefully using public charging just to see how long i could go between charges. i went 4 days once then 5 days on another stretch. drove 228 miles last week. this week, a bit lighter, looks like i will barely make 150 miles.

i did it only as a "minimally invasive intrusion into my life" and if the weather had been better, i think i could have easily made it 7 days.

what i was doing in some instances, is plugging in then taking a walk for exercise for 45 minutes to an hour (this replaces 30 minutes on the elliptical which i kinda HATE) or plugging in where i would normally shop or eat.

for example, normally i would park at where i was going to eat, but twice i plugged in at Sears and walked to the restaurant which was within 2-3 blocks.

now, this worked great when the weather was good, but got two rainy days and i dont walk in the rain, so charging was out on those days.

either way, it does greatly contribute to my 2.14 cents per mile cost for Feb. (normally would be around 2.85 or so)

 

[N1ghtrider]

The original N1ghtrider just achieved my tenth 100 mile-plus range on a single charge--and 5th time more than 105 miles--with 106.3 miles. LBW at 93.2. Never hit VLB. My Carwings shows 6.0 m/kWh on this charge; the dash indicator shows 5.7.

This 106.3 miles was over 6 days (I was out of town for 3 days driving my hybrid) in warm weather with a/c on only for about 30 miles. I drove under 50 mph on city streets for all but about 15 miles.

My cumulative tally is 1,112.4 miles of driving on charges of more than 100 miles, out of a total 2,554 miles, or 43.55% of my total driving achieving 100-miles plus per charge.

 

[N1ghtrider]

Florida's flat roads and temps in the 70s let me achieve more than 100 miles (106.2) for the 11th time in my LEAF's first 2,660 miles. That is my 6th time of exceeding 105 miles on a single charge and gives me a total of 1,218.6 miles on single 100-plus mile charges, or 45.8% of my total driving.

I hit low bat at 91.3; zero bars at 105.0; vlb at 105.7 and --- at 106.

5.8 m/kWh this charge.

 

[planet4ever]

My suggestion, which I think most frequent posters on this board agree with, is to ignore the guessometer. Watch the number of blue and white bars which surround it. That is your equivalent of a "gas gauge"

How are the bars any more accurate than the 'guessometer' figure? Isnt the visual representation via number bars simply corresponding to the mileage remaining number? Has anyone actually compared the two and proven that the bars are more accurate?

I just realized we got off on a tangent (as usual) and never really answered numrut's question, other than to say the bars really are more accurate. So let me give it a try.

The system that monitors and controls the battery provides nearly continuous information about its state on what amounts to a private network. One kind of information it provides is a fairly accurate estimate of how full the battery is, calculated as (current kWh)/(maximum kWh), where "maximum" is the battery's capacity, which will decrease somewhat as the battery ages. The computer that paints the 12-bar display uses that "state of charge" information in a slightly biased way to decide how many bars to light up. Tony's chart shows (among many other valuable things) our best estimate of the percentages where bar jumps occur.

I'm not sure anyone fully understands the algorithm used by the guessometer, but it appears to be partly based on a different set of numbers coming from the battery monitor showing the number of (Wh's / 80) left in the battery (not adjusted for current capacity). Gary Giddings has created a little device that displays this number, and in his honor we have invented the term "GIDs" for what it shows. But the guessometer uses what appears to be a weighted average of miles/kWh from your recent driving history, coming up with a guess of miles = (kWh in the battery) x (miles/kWh). Sounds good in theory, until you think about that "recent driving history" part.

So, the bottom line is that the bars come from one set of battery numbers, while the guessometer comes from a different set of battery numbers together with a third set of numbers derived from your driving history.

Ray

 

[adric22]

So, the bottom line is that the bars come from one set of battery numbers, while the guessometer comes from a different set of battery numbers together with a third set of numbers derived from your driving history.

Wouldn't it be great if Future Leafs would have the option in the menu to change the GOM to a percentage instead (reflecting battery SOC) of miles.. And maybe even a 3rd option that displayed miles but instead of basing it on current driving patterns, have it base it on a user-defined miles per KWh and have the only changes be from turning on the climate control or ECO mode?

 

[N1ghtrider]

Folks, I have totally stayed out of the GOM discussion to date, because I have been somewhat ashamed of the fact that I find it very useful for my purposes. I know that the GOM readings are unscientific, but as one of the mileage leaders on this forum, I have to come out of the closet and say that I use the GOM (along with the m/kWh gauges) to pace my driving speed, acceleration, climate control use and other driving techniques to achieve more than 100 miles per charge for almost half (45.8%) of my total mileage.

Please don't make me an outcast for saying anything good about the GOM

 

[TomT]

In Florida, where it is seriously flat in any direction, the GOM is going to do much better than it does in most of the rest of the country where constant changes in elevation are the norm...

Please don't make me an outcast for saying anything good about the GOM

 

[Pipcecil]

Here in texas with the mild weather and fairly flat land, the GOM works pretty well in my opinion. After the update in February the number is a bit more acurate and usually shows a more conservative number. Now, the GOM works as my lowest possible range and is a good indicator of if I can make a destination or not and if I drive better I can beat that number. So the current works of the GOM are now fairly good.

I DO wish the GOM would integrate more into the Nav system. Currently it just outputs if the range on your nav destination is too far for your GOM range. I wish it was smart enough to take the average speed of the roads, plus elevation changes, temp, and wind (maybe based on just a weather report) and use those factors to estimate range when using the nav. This way, instead of predicting what your driving conditions will be based on previous ones, it knows when a freeway is coming or when hills are coming and won't have to bounce the GOM around.

 

[edatoakrun]

In Florida, where it is seriously flat in any direction, the GOM is going to do much better than it does in most of the rest of the country where constant changes in elevation are the norm...

Please don't make me an outcast for saying anything good about the GOM

Any "range" estimate" on any vehicle, is only as accurate as how complete the information of future use is, and how exactly that future actually matches the information entered.

Even if you were able to add future ascent and descent to the GOM data, variable input by the driver and weather conditions would still leave the GOM with significant uncertainties.

But it would be considerably better than what I see every day I drive, in the inter-mountain region of North California...

...Every day that I begin my driving my car with a 100% charge, I always have, IIRC, a 40-something estimate from my owner's page, and 50-something from the GOM, as a result of the about 2000 ft of ascent (and about 500 ft of descent) in the last 7 miles to my home.

Seven miles, later, on the same road, but now after 1,500 ft. of net descent, the GOM reads 100 to 110 miles, depending on temp, driving style, etc...

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=8373&start=20" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[FairwoodRed]

Folks, I have totally stayed out of the GOM discussion to date, because I have been somewhat ashamed of the fact that I find it very useful for my purposes. I know that the GOM readings are unscientific, but as one of the mileage leaders on this forum, I have to come out of the closet and say that I use the GOM (along with the m/kWh gauges) to pace my driving speed, acceleration, climate control use and other driving techniques to achieve more than 100 miles per charge for almost half (45.8%) of my total mileage.

Please don't make me an outcast for saying anything good about the GOM

Don't let the vocal few here get to you. Just like I suport people whom an Escalade works for, I support you, who the GOM work for. My troubles with the GOM do not preclude your success with it!

How are you doing on your high odometer? Miles/months? I'm at 15k in 9 mos, but the highest range I got on one charge was only about 75 miles here in hilly Seattle.

 

[Nubo]

Folks, I have totally stayed out of the GOM discussion to date, because I have been somewhat ashamed of the fact that I find it very useful for my purposes. I know that the GOM readings are unscientific, but as one of the mileage leaders on this forum, I have to come out of the closet and say that I use the GOM (along with the m/kWh gauges) to pace my driving speed, acceleration, climate control use and other driving techniques to achieve more than 100 miles per charge for almost half (45.8%) of my total mileage.

Please don't make me an outcast for saying anything good about the GOM

Regularly getting 100+ miles per charge is a pretty good indication that your driving style and route is probably a good fit for the GOM's algorithms. I do find it useful at times also. Not because it's particularly accurate, but I can get some information from the *changes* in its inaccuracy.