He did say "cell", but I expect it's really at the (half) module level, as you say. After all, they get the data off the same CAN bus as any other monitor would.TonyWilliams said:LEAFscan will allow us mere mortals to see the 96 cell PAIR voltages (that's how Nissan has configured it).
thankyouOB said:yes, and the LEAF service manager at Power Nissan in LA did not know that leaving a battery at 100% was not recommended for the car....imagine what they are doing to all those LEAFs sitting on the lot.
I strongly suspect it's because the real range of this car is 73 miles @ 100%, so at 80% you've now basically got its EPA range in the 50's, which is really not great for marketing.evchels said:thankyouOB said:yes, and the LEAF service manager at Power Nissan in LA did not know that leaving a battery at 100% was not recommended for the car....imagine what they are doing to all those LEAFs sitting on the lot.
Based on what I've seen and heard, the whole dealer process and training needs to be overhauled and refreshed.
However, it's really sort of silly that if it's that important to only charge to 80% (and while I'm not doubting, I'd love to see some data on the real-world effects, esp if only on Level 2), that the car doesn't automatically default to that mode and require an override to go to 100% when desired, a la Tesla's "range mode" for charging. Anything that crucial shouldn't be left up to the knowledge of the newest lot porter, or body shop employee, or valet, etc...
(I'm sure there's a thread about this or discussion that's already been had- happy to read up if someone wants to point me in the right direction! )
EatsShootsandLeafs said:I strongly suspect it's because the real range of this car is 73 miles @ 100%, so at 80% you've now basically got its EPA range in the 50's, which is really not great for marketing.evchels said:However, it's really sort of silly that if it's that important to only charge to 80% (and while I'm not doubting, I'd love to see some data on the real-world effects, esp if only on Level 2), that the car doesn't automatically default to that mode and require an override to go to 100% when desired, a la Tesla's "range mode" for charging. Anything that crucial shouldn't be left up to the knowledge of the newest lot porter, or body shop employee, or valet, etc...
evchels said:However, it's really sort of silly that if it's that important to only charge to 80% (and while I'm not doubting, I'd love to see some data on the real-world effects, esp if only on Level 2), that the car doesn't automatically default to that mode and require an override to go to 100% when desired, a la Tesla's "range mode" for charging. Anything that crucial shouldn't be left up to the knowledge of the newest lot porter, or body shop employee, or valet, etc...
(I'm sure there's a thread about this or discussion that's already been had- happy to read up if someone wants to point me in the right direction! )
Not only that, but they also say to avoid topping off the battery back to full until you're below 80%. They even ding you for this on the battery report. And they say to store the car charged to 80% (not 100%). This is plenty of evidence that Nissan fully knows that time spent above 80% will cause premature capacity loss.TEG said:(But I will have to disclaim this, saying it is only my opinion since we seem to have plenty who will claim that 100% is OK/fine all the time.) On the other hand, why did Nissan even bother to provide an 80% charge mode if they didn't think it was helpful in some way...
#1: Avoid full charging when you can.
...
#4: Use timers to minimize the time spent at a high state of charge.
...
#8: To maximize battery life, minimize use of DC quick charge.
All true, but oddly enough while my battery aging model doesn't (yet) account for this it seems to be pretty accurate in many cases. I haven't yet run into a case where charging to 100% was the factor that made the prediction model too optimistic. For example, I was surprised that when I checked Azdre/opossum my current model nailed their capacity loss almost exactly. As I recall, they charged to 100% most of the time. Everything I have read indicates it isn't good for the battery to leave it at high SOC for any length of time. Perhaps the initial loss of capacity (first year) is so rapid in places like Arizona from the effects of heat that the effects of high SOC tend to be lost in the noise. It may be more of a factor in subsequent years.drees said:Not only that, but they also say to avoid topping off the battery back to full until you're below 80%. They even ding you for this on the battery report. And they say to store the car charged to 80% (not 100%). This is plenty of evidence that Nissan fully knows that time spent above 80% will cause premature capacity loss.
There is simply no evidence that increasing the amount of time spent at higher SOC levels is inconsequential, while plenty of evidence that avoiding it is beneficial.
Stoaty said:...Perhaps the initial loss of capacity (first year) is so rapid in places like Arizona from the effects of heat that the effects of high SOC tend to be lost in the noise...
Old myths die hard - NiMH has no memory effect, either.TEG said:Ni-Cad and NiMH with reduced SoC range due to "memory effect" could be "reconditioned" and regain some of their former range, but Li-Ion that has been overheated repeatedly is probably irrecoverably "toasted".
I think there's simply too much noise and not enough data to really say that for the following reasons:Stoaty said:All true, but oddly enough while my battery aging model doesn't (yet) account for this it seems to be pretty accurate in many cases. I haven't yet run into a case where charging to 100% was the factor that made the prediction model too optimistic. For example, I was surprised that when I checked Azdre/opossum my current model nailed their capacity loss almost exactly. As I recall, they charged to 100% most of the time. Everything I have read indicates it isn't good for the battery to leave it at high SOC for any length of time. Perhaps the initial loss of capacity (first year) is so rapid in places like Arizona from the effects of heat that the effects of high SOC tend to be lost in the noise. It may be more of a factor in subsequent years.
Patrick did an awesome job with that article, and I believe that it's as good as it gets. These are all conservative recommendations, and we have discussed many of them on this board before Patrick published his write-up. Even with the most robust batteries, it should be up to the drivers to decide if they wanted to follow a conservative protocol or simply use the car, and not have a care in the world. Owners might be more interested in learning more about battery care than lessees. The only problem I can see is that we cannot quantify the benefits of a conservative approach easily on our own.TEG said:Perhaps anecdotal, and more hearsay, but here are some related suggestions:
plugin-cars: Eight Tips to Extend Battery Life of Your Electric Car
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the model is just an educated guess. Although it's a reasonable assumption created to fill a void, it's still speculation. Hopefully it will help set expectations, and prevent misinterpretation on the part of new owners and prospects.Stoaty said:All true, but oddly enough while my battery aging model doesn't (yet) account for this it seems to be pretty accurate in many cases. I haven't yet run into a case where charging to 100% was the factor that made the prediction model too optimistic. For example, I was surprised that when I checked Azdre/opossum my current model nailed their capacity loss almost exactly. As I recall, they charged to 100% most of the time. Everything I have read indicates it isn't good for the battery to leave it at high SOC for any length of time. Perhaps the initial loss of capacity (first year) is so rapid in places like Arizona from the effects of heat that the effects of high SOC tend to be lost in the noise. It may be more of a factor in subsequent years.
It is an educated guess, but one based mostly on interpolation of Nissan's own data. I think it is the best we have to go on currently, but obviously could be too optimistic (possibly) or too pessimistic (probably not).surfingslovak said:Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the model is just an educated guess. Although it's a reasonable assumption created to fill a void, it's still speculation. Hopefully it will help set expectations, and prevent misinterpretation on the part of new owners and prospects.
drees said:...Old myths die hard - NiMH has no memory effect, either...
FORD: 1999-2001 RANGER
Some Ranger Electric Vehicles (EVs) may experience steadily declining driving range. This may be caused by Nickel-Metal Hydride batteries that suffer from a condition where, if not fully discharged on a regular basis, the battery may lose much of its ability to deliver energy, thus reducing the vehicle’s range.
ACTION:
To maintain vehicle range, it is recommended the battery be deep discharged once every two weeks.
This procedure may require several cycles to recover energy/range...
As an ordinary person, I am not a geek, wonk, scientist and as my wife would say "not brilliant in any way", I have one observation. When we purchased the Leaf, we were told (and the manual backs this up) that 73 miles would be the avg. distance in D, the default driving setting. But, we could get more by using a "longer-range" mode called ECO. This is true. Now we come to the battery and the manual again states there is a "longer-life mode" by charging the battery to 80% even though the default setting is 100%. Any normal person would think that would be an extender to the advertised life of the battery (80% for 5 and 70% for 10 years). As I see it, I get more than advertised range by using the "longer-range" mode but I only get advertised (or in my case, less than advertised with a 2 bar loss) by using the "longer-life" mode of charging. To a normal person's ears, this sounds like "bait and switch"evchels said:thankyouOB said:yes, and the LEAF service manager at Power Nissan in LA did not know that leaving a battery at 100% was not recommended for the car....imagine what they are doing to all those LEAFs sitting on the lot.
Based on what I've seen and heard, the whole dealer process and training needs to be overhauled and refreshed.
However, it's really sort of silly that if it's that important to only charge to 80% (and while I'm not doubting, I'd love to see some data on the real-world effects, esp if only on Level 2), that the car doesn't automatically default to that mode and require an override to go to 100% when desired, a la Tesla's "range mode" for charging. Anything that crucial shouldn't be left up to the knowledge of the newest lot porter, or body shop employee, or valet, etc...
(I'm sure there's a thread about this or discussion that's already been had- happy to read up if someone wants to point me in the right direction! )
DaveinOlyWA said:we also have a phenomena where machines thrive on constant use and lightly used machines seen to age faster.
mwalsh said:DaveinOlyWA said:we also have a phenomena where machines thrive on constant use and lightly used machines seen to age faster.
Li-Ion batteries too maybe. I bought two Toshiba laptops for my office in April. One is never turned off, and charged as needed (the one I use personally), and the other is a loaner that I seldom allow use of and is charged maybe once a month. The battery on the laptop I use is showing 1% degradation. The seldom used battery is showing 7% degradation.
mwalsh said:Li-Ion batteries too maybe. I bought two Toshiba laptops for my office in April. One is never turned off, and charged as needed (the one I use personally), and the other is a loaner that I seldom allow use of and is charged maybe once a month. The battery on the laptop I use is showing 1% degradation. The seldom used battery is showing 7% degradation.DaveinOlyWA said:we also have a phenomena where machines thrive on constant use and lightly used machines seen to age faster.
Enter your email address to join: