vrwl
Well-known member
LOL! Ok! I didn't even look at the location of the dealership, just assumed it was his since he posted it. Nevermind, go back to your regularly scheduled programming...
TRONZ said:Just a quick check-in.
LEAF #202, 21 months, 20,757 miles, 100% on L1 every day, All 12 capacity bars present.
TonyWilliams said:TRONZ said:Just a quick check-in.
LEAF #202, 21 months, 20,757 miles, 100% on L1 every day, All 12 capacity bars present.
Have you put a Gidmeter on it? If not, I'm confident somebody nearby can.
gaswalla said:TonyWilliams said:TRONZ said:Just a quick check-in.
LEAF #202, 21 months, 20,757 miles, 100% on L1 every day, All 12 capacity bars present.
Have you put a Gidmeter on it? If not, I'm confident somebody nearby can.
Why do you want to ruin his happiness?
edatoakrun said:New reports of capacity bar loss slowed to a trickle after September, and none have been reported for 18 days to date.
http://mynissanleaf.com/wiki/index.php?title=Real_World_Battery_Capacity_Loss#four_bars" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
As I have mentioned before, the rate of bar loss until next Spring will be a strong indicator of the relative contributions of actual capacity loss to "gauge error", in causing capacity bar loss. If the capacity bars were accurate (and the LEAF BMS does not adapt to temperature, limiting charge levels in hotter conditions) large numbers of new LEAFs should still be losing bars, albeit likely at a slower rate than during the Summer, when they may have actually been losing capacity at a more rapid rate.
IMO it is beginning to look like "gauge error", corresponding to battery/ambient temperatures, has very likely been a major, or even predominant, cause of LEAF capacity bar loss.
DaveinOlyWA said:we can simply whip out our sliderule and recompute the dash info ourselves
One more piece of evidence that charging to 100% doesn't appear to be a major factor affecting battery life (not that I am going to change my habits, though, since it may still make a couple percent difference per year). A bit surprising, but it certainly didn't appear to be a significant factor in the Arizona capacity bar loss saga.TRONZ said:Just a quick check-in.
LEAF #202, 21 months, 20,757 miles, 100% on L1 every day, All 12 capacity bars present.
Stoaty said:One more piece of evidence that charging to 100% doesn't appear to be a major factor affecting battery life...TRONZ said:Just a quick check-in.
LEAF #202, 21 months, 20,757 miles, 100% on L1 every day, All 12 capacity bars present.
="Stoaty"...A bit surprising, but it certainly didn't appear to be a significant factor in the Arizona capacity bar loss saga.
DaveinOlyWA said:what good is a BMS that does not adapt?
edatoakrun said:New reports of capacity bar loss slowed to a trickle after September, and none have been reported for 18 days to date.
http://mynissanleaf.com/wiki/index.php?title=Real_World_Battery_Capacity_Loss#four_bars" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
As I have mentioned before, the rate of bar loss until next Spring will be a strong indicator of the relative contributions of actual capacity loss to "gauge error", in causing capacity bar loss. If the capacity bars were accurate (and the LEAF BMS does not adapt to temperature, limiting charge levels in hotter conditions) large numbers of new LEAFs should still be losing bars, albeit likely at a slower rate than during the Summer, when they may have actually been losing capacity at a more rapid rate.
IMO it is beginning to look like "gauge error", corresponding to battery/ambient temperatures, has very likely been a major, or even predominant, cause of LEAF capacity bar loss.
I don't follow you here. Boston shows 84% capacity remaining after 5 years from the graph TickTock made. Isn't that above 80%?TonyWilliams said:Nissan's own data suggests faster degradation than originally forecast, even for Boston. Yes, the instruments aren't doing so well, either.
How that is so difficult to follow?
Randy3 said:Lost my first bar this morning.
VIN: 00204
Date of Loss: 10/12/2012
Odometer: 14,250
Month of Manufacture: 11/2010
Purchase Date: 01/11/2011
Times Quick Charged: zero
Times charged to 100%: about 35
Driving Style: I don't keep a running miles/kwh since purchase, but I generally get high 4's and low 5's. My wife, however, gets high 3's and low 4's (she drives it like an ICE).
Temp: I've had my LEAF for two summers, where we get about 20-30 days per summer over 100 degrees f. We avoid driving and parking the car in direct sunlight on those days. (For instance, my wife takes the our Insight to work when we know it's going to be over 100f.) Temp reading in car has been generally 6 bars for the past 3 months or so, until just the past 10 days or so, when it's been 5 bars.
Notes:
1. This morning, I charged the car to 100% and it sat for 5-6 hours before I used it. I didn't think that would be a bad thing. Wouldn't that time be used to balance the cells?
2. The post-charge GOM and battery measurements have been reading differently than normal for the past few days. Other than today, I've been charging to 80%, using a timer set to end at 7am. All summer long, I've been getting post charge car wings messages that the car charged "9 out of 12 bars." But for the past few days, I've been getting "11 out of 12 bars" messages. I had not seen that before. Also, I normally get GOM readings of about 72 miles available after charging to 80%. But, for the past few (and not before), the GOM has been reading 61 miles available post 80% charge.
So, I'm open to recommendations about putting in a ticket with 1-800-NoGasEV (think I got that number right). I know the car's battery is a consumable. Maybe this is all normal. The car works well for all my around town needs. But I enjoy occasionally driving it to the San Francisco Bay Area and to Yosemite (charging along the way). I hope this has not crippled my ability to make these trips.
Don't count on it. I am still astounded at Nissan's scrambled response to the battery capacity loss issue. I was instructed to take my car to the dealer to meet with a Nissan engineer who would test my car. When I met with the field rep (not engineer) he assured me that within a week or so of his test, I would be contacted by someone from the Arbitration department. In response to a flippant comment from me that I expected to leave that day with more capacity showing than when I arrived (a la Tick Tock), he very seriously told me that "Nissan is taking this very, very seriously. They are going to do something for you. I don't know what it is, but they are going to do something for you."Randy3 said:When battery improvements are made, Nissan better remember those of us who are their early supporters.
Stoaty said:I don't follow you here. Boston shows 84% capacity remaining after 5 years from the graph TickTock made. Isn't that above 80%?TonyWilliams said:Nissan's own data suggests faster degradation than originally forecast, even for Boston. Yes, the instruments aren't doing so well, either.
How that is so difficult to follow?
Randy3 said:She explained that they don't warranty battery capacity, I asked if I should be speaking to an attorney instead of speaking to Nissan (she said she is obligated to tell me certain things, like this). Oh, she also asked how I knew that the first battery capacity bar represented 15%. I told her that the forum has pictures of documents, manuals, etc. and I saw it in the forum. She advised me that Nissan does not support any forum (like this one).
Enter your email address to join: