Capacity Loss on 2011-2012 LEAFs

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.
dsh said:
Phoenix, AZ. As on 08/04/12, I am reporting 2nd bar capacity loss on 2011 Nissan LEAF with 7,230 miles. Purchased car with only 7,063 miles and had total of 11 bars, now have total of 10.

Contacted Nissan LEAF Customer Care after noticed first bar loss and assigned case # 9074980. Spoke to Representative, who said Nissan is conducting test on battery loss, specifically as it relates to Hot Weather Climates, but testing not concluded yet. Just recontacted Nissan LEAF Customer Care today, 08/04/12 and had them add to case # that am down to 10 bars.

When go in for 24 month check up in 04/2013, will have them determine if replacing separate modules or cells will be covered under warranty.

Spoke to Nissan Leaf Service Advisor in Chandler, Arizona and he says is aware of 'battery capacity loss" issues in Arizona's hot climate, and is also waiting to see if Nissan will start recall on these vehicles to replace heat damaged modules or cells.

I am hoping they will recall vehicles being affected by premature battery capacity loss and replace modules or cell with more HEAVY DUTY design.

I guess will need to see what Nissan's testing of these vehicles in hot weather climate produces.

Anybody know cost of individual modules or cells in these LEAF battery packs?

dsh, I've added your car to the Battery Capacity Lost wiki. Can you provide us with some additional information about your car so we can complete your entry? We need to know the date you purchased your car, and the date you reported your car to Nissan about the battery loss. Thanks for your help with this. :)
 
Because we are now starting to see PRE-OWNED Leafs hitting the capacity bar list (mine will be there soon as well), I would like to suggest we start collecting another data point for these "Bars Lost" cars.... The manufacture date.

If you'll open your driver-side door, there is a black metal plate on the frame of the car between the driver door and the rear passenger door (near the bottom) that says "Manufactured by Nissan Motor Co Ltd" and right underneath that line on the left is is the month and the year the car was manufactured.

Right now, we collect the number of months the car was owned at the time of the loss of the capacity bars and that worked fine for brand new cars. But with the introduction of Pre-Owned cars to the list, it seems we need a data point which shows the true age of the car, thus my request to collect the additional data.

I can add the additional column to the Wiki tables, and so if those of you who have already reported bar losses (who still own the affected cars) can provide us with your Manufacture Date based on the metal plate at the location specified, I think that might be helpful.
 
I would like to make sure Oklahoma is also added to the list. We are in 105 - 113 temps here as well. And with a gid meter I can see my car loosing capscity. I have only owned it 2 and half months and just got the gid meter about a month ago so I don't what it was then but when I first tested at 100% a month ago I got 701 gids on a 100% charge. Now just one month later I get 258 gids!!! tell me I am misstaken but my car is also loosing capscity and I live in Oklahoma!!!

Stoaty said:
[quote
="Lopton"]technically it would be "normal" behavior if all the cars in AZ are doing it :lol:
Unfortunately, my guess is that this is "normal" behavior for cars in AZ. Not sure how it could be otherwise with the high temps and lack of TMS. The problem is that Nissan didn't tell the purchasers before the sale that this would be normal behavior in AZ. The Leaf design is probably fine for many (most?) areas of the country, it just doesn't work for Arizona/Texas/California desert.[/quote]
 
This was regarding my "10 people I know" sample in Phoenix...

Please report if the other 6 with bar losses also spent very large amounts of time at 100% charge, as your LEAF has, and/or also have the same high miles, that your car has.
Haven't we already beat that to death? I believe they all had 8,000 to 20,000 miles. Some exclusively charged to 80% and never or almost never fast charged. One even air conditioned his garage.

Sorry, but I think we are getting a bit crazy with the amount of data we are trying to collect. Many of the cars in my sample and in the wiki tables are owned by people who are not on the forum, and I've just about reached the limit of how many times I will bug people for more details. I'm going to at least wait until Nissan returns the Casa Grande cars and see what they say.
 
Yes, I knew there were 11 bars when purchased, but noticed other used LEAF's with higher mileage i.e. 11,000+ miles with 11 bars, so thought it was normal.

Here is the information requested for the Battery Capacity Loss Wiki Table:

Date Purchased: 07/28/12
Date Reported to Nissan: 07/30/12 and 08/04/12
Manufacture Date: 03/2011

Hope this helps and does anyone know any LEAF owner who paid to have any modules replaced and how many needed replacing?

Thank you.
 
dsh said:
Hope this helps and does anyone know any LEAF owner who paid to have any modules replaced and how many needed replacing?

To my knowledge, nobody has had to buy a module.... yet. Since I fully expect a "Citizens, all is well" from Nissan regarding capacity loss, and since I suspect the battery degrades all cells somewhat uniformly, the cheapest way to get back your range won't be buying up to 48 of the $600 modules (that are going to degrade exactly the same way as the ones you have).

The cheapest answer is probably unloading the car for something new, but if you have a lease, at least in California, I would go with Lemon Law proceedings (within 18 months of new) to give them back their car.

Much like Honda, you can absolutely count on lawsuits, should Nissan blunder as badly as Honda did. That's a very long term solution whose outcome is far from certain. I'd find a way to unload the car over buying any cells: not even one cell, since you'll be chasing a problem with your money that won't go away, and Nissan and the dealer make a huge profit off their faulty battery.

Imagine paying to drop the battery (one dealer charged $3000-$4000 for this when the car needed painting) every time you want to replace a cell. The costs would very quickly get out of hand.

Please don't do it.
 
surfingslovak said:
This means that vehicle age contributes about twice as much as mileage. In another words, you would expect a one-year-old Leaf with 24 K miles to have about the same level of capacity loss as a two-year-old Leaf with 12 K miles. The higher mileage car would have twice as many full charge cycles. Mileage and charge cycles should be interchangeable in this context.

Although I excluded the Arizona Leafs from the calculation, it's pretty obvious that average ambient temperature seems to have an overwhelming effect.
One year is not going to be equivalent to 150 cycles. That would be inconsistent with everything known about Li-ion. The data doesn't seem right to me. For example, it's hard to believe you could put over 500 cycles (38,000 miles) on the batteries and have less than a 2% capacity loss. It would be great but not likely.

I wonder if the charger is regulating the amount of energy put into the car based on temperature.
 
mksE55 said:
Add another TX car to the list. Just the other day lost my 12th bar just at 11,000 miles. I have been following along wondering when I would go since the heat issues looks like an obvious battery problem for Nissan. luckily on a lease but was hoping to purchase the car and cont to save thousands on gas. I am a little shocked I didnt make it to the 12,000mile mark. I purchased the car with 3000miles on it from the dealer, and no they were not using the 80% charge rule when I test drove it or weeks later when I purchased the car. I did a mix of 100% charging in the winter and usually 80% summer. Still have saved over 250.00 monthly in gas. My drive distance is short about 15-25 miles a day so I dont think I have to change my driving habits yet. I will sit back and see what Nissan does about this issue for now.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/84220810@N03/7710447022/

mksE55, if possible, we need more data about your battery loss for the Wiki:

1. Where in Texas are you located?
2. Date you purchased your car?
3. Manufacture date of your car? (see metal plate on door frame inside driver's side door)
4. Have you reported this battery loss to Nissan's 800 number? If yes, what date and what's the case number assigned to your car?
5. Last 5 digits of your VIN number?
6. Was this a pre-owned vehicle?
 
opossum said:
This was regarding my "10 people I know" sample in Phoenix...

Please report if the other 6 with bar losses also spent very large amounts of time at 100% charge, as your LEAF has, and/or also have the same high miles, that your car has.
Haven't we already beat that to death? I believe they all had 8,000 to 20,000 miles. Some exclusively charged to 80% and never or almost never fast charged. One even air conditioned his garage.

Sorry, but I think we are getting a bit crazy with the amount of data we are trying to collect. Many of the cars in my sample and in the wiki tables are owned by people who are not on the forum, and I've just about reached the limit of how many times I will bug people for more details. I'm going to at least wait until Nissan returns the Casa Grande cars and see what they say.

Please attribute all quotes, and post a link to the source, for context.

azdre/opossum.

I think you have damaged your own credibility, with your 7/30 edit to your post starting this thread:

EDIT: 7/30/2012
Summary of thread: This is definitely a problem in hot climates. There appears to be NO correlation to car color, air conditioned garages, 80% charging, driving efficiency, miles driven, quick charging, or anything else beside outside ambient temperature. In other words, cars are being treated exactly as outlined in the owner's manual. We personally know at least a dozen leaf owners, many not mentioned below that have lost at least 15% capacity. According to the ScanGuage, the 2 that haven't lost one, are in the 80's and will be losing one soon. Nissan still claims this is normal, gradual loss and not covered under warranty. Phoenix has now seen up to 30% loss in one year, 25,000 miles of driving.

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=8802" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

IMO, it is fairly certain that the factors that we all expected to lead to more rapid capacity degradation, battery temperature, amount of use of the high and low end of battery capacity, and amount of time spent at high and low charge level, are all now showing up in loss of capacity bars, and gid/SOC reports.

The only unexpected result, is the relatively rapid loss of bars and gids on some LEAFs, and the very high correlation with operation in hot climates.

However, at least some of the loss of SOC/gids, seems likely to not be due to battery degradation, but by other temporary factors, perhaps due to the BMS limiting the charge level. IIRC, no one one this forum foresaw the possibility of adaptive charge limiting for LEAF batteries in hot climates. Maybe this is why what seems to be likely evidence of BMS operation, doesn't seem to be sinking in.

The only comprehensive observation of gid levels in a hot climate, over last year, by TickTock seems to show that much of his capacity deficiency last Fall, was recovered over the Winter, and much of the previously lower capacity was probably never due to “battery degradation” at all.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0An7gtcYL2Oy0dHNwVmRkNkFnaEVOQTVENW5mOTZlb0E&pli=1#gid=1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

However, the observed reduction in capacity caused by the behaviors below, leaving the battery at high SOC for long periods, or habitually running the battery down to very low capacity, probably is due to permanently degraded battery capacity.

azdre

Let's see if I can answer all of your questions:

* We always charge to 100% (we drive it a lot, 17,000 miles in 14 months of driving).
* We do 'top it off' a lot. That's the one item we got 4/5 stars on the battery check in March 2012.
* The car sat at 100% for a month in May, 2011, not plugged in.
* It's almost always garaged or in covered parking.
* We get the low battery warning about once a month.
* Never turtled. Been meaning to try this out though.
* We've QC'd 2-3 times this spring.
* There's been no error messages (aside from the A/C fiasco last summer, please don't make me relive that one.)
* My husband is a nut about keeping the tire pressure monitored and consistant.
* I'll pull the carwings data and add it to here tonight.

I'm thinking I should take it in to the dealer for some documentation even if they turn me away initially.


Last edited by azdre on Wed May 09, 2012 11:32 am, edited 1 time in total.

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=8802&start=10" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

TonyWilliams

My update on the red 2011 LEAF, serial #2244

I called and reported my car today. I've lost 15-18% capacity (as measured in actual performance; not the insane GuessOmeter, CarWings, or other methods), however the car still has all 12 capacity bars. I expect that first 15% loss of capacity bar to disappear any day. I no longer own it....

The car was never exposed to exceptionally hot climates, and probably only saw temps over 90F a few times. It was never left at 100% charge for any length of time. For storage, it was left at 50%. It frequently used the entire capacity of its battery to complete 2000 miles per month. It experienced turtle mode about 20 times...

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=8802&start=2190" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


By collecting more accurate reports of use, we can find out if this is what is actually occurring.

You could contribute by explaining your own use in more detail.

Looks like you have been driving about 1800 miles per month over this Summer, with your range now significantly limited by lower available battery capacity.

What are your usual high and low charge levels and charging/recharging practices?

How hot is it typically, while your LEAF is parked?

Seems like a hot-climate LEAF owner could do the worst damage, and/or limit charge levels most severely, by driving and recharging during the heat of the day, then preventing battery cooling at night, by parking in a hot and poorly vented garage.
 
edatoakrun said:
Seems like a hot-climate LEAF owner could do the worst damage, and/or limit charge levels most severely, by driving and recharging during the heat of the day, then preventing battery cooling at night, by parking in a hot and poorly vented garage.

Had Nissan told me that I cannot charge the car when the weather is hot, I would have not purchased it. This is an engineering problem, please stop blaming the victims.
 
leafwing said:
edatoakrun said:
Seems like a hot-climate LEAF owner could do the worst damage, and/or limit charge levels most severely, by driving and recharging during the heat of the day, then preventing battery cooling at night, by parking in a hot and poorly vented garage.

Had Nissan told me that I cannot charge the car when it is hot, I would have not purchased it. This is an engineering problem, please do not blame the victims.

Exactly. And why does Nissan even bother to install a Quick Charge port in the car if you're not supposed to charge it when it's hot? I mean, isn't the whole purpose of the Quick Charge port to be able to get a quick charge while you're out and about and driving to a destination? It defeats the whole point of the QC port if you can't use it when the battery or weather is hot.
 
vrwl said:
Exactly. And why does Nissan even bother to install a Quick Charge port in the car if you're not supposed to charge it when it's hot? I mean, isn't the whole purpose of the Quick Charge port to be able to get a quick charge while you're out and about and driving to a destination? It defeats the whole point of the QC port if you can't use it when the battery is hot.

Absolutely, and I inquired about this shortly after purchasing my LEAF. Here is what the chat support advice I received.

Code:
Please wait while we find an agent to assist you...

You have been connected to Eric W.

Eric W: Thank you for contacting Nissan LEAF Consumer Affairs. How may I assist you?

JP White: Hi I've been reading the Owners Manual and have a question regarding some advice it gives......

Eric W: Go ahead.

JP White: ..... On page EV-22 it says to let the batery cool after use prior to charging. Does that apply even if the battery temp is in the normal range?

Eric W: The intention is not to attempt to charge the battery if the temperature of the battery is above a certain point at which charging could be detrimental to the battery.

JP White: Normally it maintains 'six bars' on the temperature gauge. Is that an acceptable temp to begin charging or should one wait anyway?

Eric W: Just a moment please.

JP White: k

Eric W: It should be acceptable to charge the vehicle if the battery temperature gauge shows that the battery is within normal range (between the blue and red gauge squares.

JP White: OK Thanks. That answers my question

Eric W: Is there anything else I can assist you with today?

JP White: No Thanks. I appreciate your help today.

Since the AZ issues surfaced I've taken to waiting until either the garage temp drops or until I get an email reminder to plug my vehicle in (which I have configured on Carwings to send after 30 minutes). Mild inconvenience has resulted already by waiting to charge. I got a call this past week, needed to meet my son and we agreed to meet up to save him the drive all the way. He had to come 3/4 the distance since I didn't have enough charge to get to Nashville and back. Had I plugged in on arriving home, there would not have been an issue. News of failing batteries in hot regions have me spooked. Come on Nissan the silence is deafening.
 
vrwl said:
Because we are now starting to see PRE-OWNED Leafs hitting the capacity bar list (mine will be there soon as well), I would like to suggest we start collecting another data point for these "Bars Lost" cars.... The manufacture date.
I've added my mfg date into the Wiki table.
 
JPWhite said:
Code:
Please wait while we find an agent to assist you...

You have been connected to Eric W.

Eric W: Thank you for contacting Nissan LEAF Consumer Affairs. How may I assist you?

JP White: Hi I've been reading the Owners Manual and have a question regarding some advice it gives......

Eric W: Go ahead.

JP White: ..... On page EV-22 it says to let the battery cool after use prior to charging. Does that apply even if the battery temp is in the normal range?

Eric W: The intention is not to attempt to charge the battery if the temperature of the battery is above a certain point at which charging could be detrimental to the battery.

JP White: Normally it maintains 'six bars' on the temperature gauge. Is that an acceptable temp to begin charging or should one wait anyway?

Eric W: Just a moment please.

JP White: k

Eric W: It should be acceptable to charge the vehicle if the battery temperature gauge shows that the battery is within normal range (between the blue and red gauge squares.

JP White: OK Thanks. That answers my question

Eric W: Is there anything else I can assist you with today?

JP White: No Thanks. I appreciate your help today.
There's an obvious contradiction here. According to the transcript above, Eric from Nissan said that the normal temperature range is within the blue and red ranges. But on the other hand, you're not supposed to keep the battery at the 120C level for more than 24 hrs. Well, 7 bars is between 98.2C to 122C, so if the temperature bar says 122C is normal, why can't the battery be under warranty at 120C for 24 hrs, if up to 135C (top range of 10 bars) is considered "normal" since it's not in the red?

Segments Degrees C (F)
12 60 (140)
11 57.5 (135.5)
10 55 (131)
9 52.5 (126.5)
8 50 (122)
7 36.8 (98.2)
6 23.5 (74.3)
5 10.3 (50.5)
4 -3 (26.6)
3 -6 (21.2
2 -9 (15.8)
1 -12 (10.4)
0 -15 (5)
 
Volusiano said:
There's an obvious contradiction here. According to the transcript above, Eric from Nissan said that the normal temperature range is within the blue and red ranges. But on the other hand, you're not supposed to keep the battery at the 120C level for more than 24 hrs. Well, 7 bars is between 98.2C to 122C, so if the temperature bar says 122C is normal, why can't the battery be under warranty at 120C for 24 hrs, if up to 135C (top range of 10 bars) is considered "normal" since it's not in the red?

Segments Degrees C (F)
12 60 (140)
11 57.5 (135.5)
10 55 (131)
9 52.5 (126.5)
8 50 (122)
7 36.8 (98.2)
6 23.5 (74.3)
5 10.3 (50.5)
4 -3 (26.6)
3 -6 (21.2
2 -9 (15.8)
1 -12 (10.4)
0 -15 (5)

Yes, I had the same thoughts about that... "between the blue and red gauge squares" essentially means we could safely charge our batteries anywhere from 15.8 degrees F to 135.5 degrees F.
 
SanDust said:
One year is not going to be equivalent to 150 cycles. That would be inconsistent with everything known about Li-ion. The data doesn't seem right to me. For example, it's hard to believe you could put over 500 cycles (38,000 miles) on the batteries and have less than a 2% capacity loss. It would be great but not likely.

I wonder if the charger is regulating the amount of energy put into the car based on temperature.
Indeed. It's a tiny sample, and perhaps you won't be surprised to hear that not everyone took this issue seriously when I approached them about it couple of months ago. Whether you agree with the conclusions or not, the takeaway for me was that there is a surprisingly strong correlation between Gid counts published on the forum and ambient temperature. This suggested to me that the situation will get worse in the heat of the summer. That's why I brought it up, and the issue was escalated to Nissan as well. To be quite honest with you, I did not expect to see quite as rapid decline of capacity as we did in some cases.

As has been pointed out by you and others, there is a very good chance that not all of the capacity loss we are seeing is permanent. This might explain perhaps 5% or as even much as 10% of the decline, but it would be a stretch to argue that Scott Yarosh has lost 35% of his battery capacity due to some seasonal adjustments the BMS or the charger are making. Additionally, we have not seen much change in pack voltage. The 1.5 to 2 Volts difference we occasionally see would only account for a delta of about 10 to 15 Gids.

The mileage number is somewhat arbitrary as an example to help put the numbers in proper context. And while we talk about unusual behavior, let me point out that I have not seen anything quite like this in either the MINI-E field trial or the Tesla Roadster data samples I collected last year. Roadster battery capacity seems to correlate to mileage much more strongly than what we see with the Leaf.

Although it took quite a bit of time and effort, the data I collected and the subsequent analysis was literally the equivalent of a back-of-a-napkin calculation. My goal was get a sense of the urgency of the situation, and while you can argue with the methods and conclusions, I'm glad I did it and that the issue was escalated.

That said, I would like thank you for the kind words and encourage everyone to continue to collect and analyze data. I believe that we have a very valuable collection of skill sets and experience in this community and we can accomplish something meaningful together. The scrutiny and attention this board gets from Nissan is a testament to that.

1
 
surfingslovak said:
SanDust said:
...I wonder if the charger is regulating the amount of energy put into the car based on temperature.

....As has been pointed out by you and others, there is a very good chance that not all of the capacity loss we are seeing is permanent. This might explain perhaps 5% or as even much as 10% of the decline, but it would be a stretch to argue that Scott Yarosh has lost 35% of his battery capacity due to some seasonal adjustments the BMS or the charger are making...

Well, I think we really don't know if the BMS is responsible for none of the decline in gid counts, or for most of it, in the LEAFs with loss of one or two bars, and ~15%-25% capacity So there's no reason I can see to suggest a range of "...5% or as even much as 10%"..., yet.

Any number of explanations may exist for those few LEAFs which now have anomalous much lower gid counts, from manufacturing defects, to exposure to temperatures or other conditions beyond the expected conditions of use, either before or after those LEAFs were delivered.


surfingslovak

...Additionally, we have not seen much change in pack voltage. The 1.5 to 2 Volts difference we occasionally see would only account for a delta of about 10 to 15 Gids...

Yes, this is very hard to reconcile with any significant amount of BMS charge limiting, IMO

Unless, the voltage numbers are incorrect, or intentionally "spoofed" as someone else has suggested (IIRC) somewhere back in this epic thread
 
vrwl said:
Yes, I had the same thoughts about that... "between the blue and red gauge squares" essentially means we could safely charge our batteries anywhere from 15.8 degrees F to 135.5 degrees F.

Contradictions aren't hard to find . Page EV-20 of the owners manual states
Code:
EV-20

NISSAN recommends that you connect
the normal charge cable when getting
out of the vehicle, even if it is not going
to be used. By doing this, you can get
the most out of the remote climate
control and Climate Ctrl. Timer functions
the next time you use the vehicle

While page EV-22 states

Code:
EV-22

Allow the vehicle and Li-ion battery to cool
down after use before charging.

It's these two pages in the manual that prompted me to contact Nissan in the first place, cause I wasn't sure what to do to take good care of the vehicle. I can't say I am enlightened now.
 
edatoakrun said:
Well, I think we really don't know if the BMS is responsible for none of the decline in gid counts, or for most of it, in the LEAFs with loss of one or two bars, and ~15%-20% capacity So there's no reason I can see to suggest a range of "...5% or as even much as 10%"..., yet.
Certainly, it's a matter of opinion. I wouldn't expect anything else on this forum. Hopefully my track record is enough to tell you that I generally don't pull numbers out of thin air. Let's say that it's educated speculation?

edatoakrun said:
Any number of explanations may exist for those few LEAFs which now have anomalous much lower gid counts, from manufacturing defects, to exposure to temperatures or other conditions beyond the expected conditions of use, either before or after those LEAFs were delivered.

Correct. And while on the topic, let me mention that I would consider some of the rationalizations a stretch. While we can argue about the effects of climate change we are seeing this summer, it's a bit disingenuous to suggest that all of the battery capacity issues could be explained that way.

I was disapointed when it was suggested that this was a rounding error at worst and a statistical aberration at best. However given the sample size, it was difficult to argue otherwise.

Don't get me wrong, I would rather be discussing something else than this problem. Let's hope that there will be a plausible explanation and a positive outcome.
 
Back
Top