Capacity Loss on 2011-2012 LEAFs

[cwerdna]

I've been reading through this thread and have found it very interesting. Unfortunately, there are ao many pages that I have yet to find the answer I am looking for. I am very curious if anyone has successfully had Nissan buy back their LEAF outside of AZ?

Yes, ALLWATZ in Palm Springs. Darren, what's your situation, if you don't mind me asking?

And Darren, can you please update your location field so we have some idea where you are?

 

[Darren]

I've been reading through this thread and have found it very interesting. Unfortunately, there are ao many pages that I have yet to find the answer I am looking for. I am very curious if anyone has successfully had Nissan buy back their LEAF outside of AZ?

Yes, ALLWATZ in Palm Springs. Darren, what's your situation, if you don't mind me asking?

And Darren, can you please update your location field so we have some idea where you are?

More of a curiosity than anything right now. I leased the car early on when Nissan was touting 100 miles range. I have never gotten that and it just seems like it keeps decreasing. I am currently lucky to get 60 miles, even though it still shows full bars.

My location has been updated to reflect San Diego, CA.

 

[cwerdna]

More of a curiosity than anything right now. I leased the car early on when Nissan was touting 100 miles range. I have never gotten that and it just seems like it keeps decreasing. I am currently lucky to get 60 miles, even though it still shows full bars.

My location has been updated to reflect San Diego, CA.

Thanks for updating your location.

Have you lost any battery capacity bars? It's ridiculous that even in late 2012, Nissan reps at auto shows were STILL telling people 100 miles of range. Nobody at http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=11201" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; thinks that's the right answer.

I think someone really needs to put together a standard questionnaire for people complaining about range. I'm starting another thread for that. I'd own it if I had a Leaf and knew all the quirks/what's appropriate to ask or not.

 

[RegGuheert]

Have you lost any battery capacity bars? It's ridiculous that even in late 2012, Nissan reps at auto shows were STILL telling people 100 miles of range.

...and the 2013 LEAF Owner's Manual still says to expect to get 100 miles on the LA4 cycle and to expect to have 80% battery capacity remaining after 5 years...

 

[cwerdna]

Have you lost any battery capacity bars? It's ridiculous that even in late 2012, Nissan reps at auto shows were STILL telling people 100 miles of range.

...and the 2013 LEAF Owner's Manual still says to expect to get 100 miles on the LA4 cycle and to expect to have 80% battery capacity remaining after 5 years...

Hmmm... thanks!

I downloaded it and found it also has the same claim as the '12 manual that I posted about at http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=262210#p262210" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

The majority of drivers will experience vehicle ranges between 62 to 138 miles (99 to 222 km) based on the many factors that affect vehicle range...

 

[Darren]

If Nissan's claims about range are so well documented, do we have any retaliation if we don't lose bars and aren't in AZ?

Overall, I am still in love with the car and the concept of EV's but I am getting increasingly frustrated with the range.

 

[TomT]

I guess I'm an over achiever since I was already there with well less than two years on the vehicle and in a not particularly hot climate...

...and the 2013 LEAF Owner's Manual still says to expect to get 100 miles on the LA4 cycle and to expect to have 80% battery capacity remaining after 5 years...

 

[Volusiano]

The thing is, they intentionally packed the first 15% of battery capacity in the first bar, while subsequent bars only has 6.25% capacity. So you can lose as much as 14% capacity and still see all 12 bars and not know that you've lost any officially. Except that you have that nagging feeling that you're not quite getting the same range as you used to get anymore....

 

[cwerdna]

If Nissan's claims about range are so well documented, do we have any retaliation if we don't lose bars and aren't in AZ?

Overall, I am still in love with the car and the concept of EV's but I am getting increasingly frustrated with the range.

Probably not. IIRC, 1 capacity bar losers in AZ have been denied buyback. Not sure about 2-bar, OTOH.

If you have range complaints, we're going to need more info. Not sure if you should start a new thread or piggyback on an existing range complaint thread. I wish people would chime in on http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=31&t=11591&p=267610" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;. I think you could start by answering those questions. Perhaps a good questionnaire would develop from that...

Without any more info, all I have are guesses like: you're driving too fast, you're running the heater (maybe unintentionally), you're relying on the GOM too much, you're not running as low as you think you are, you're not charging to 100%, you haven't let the battery balance, you've got unfavorable elevation changes, your tires are underinflated, etc.

 

[RickS]

We can add JN1AZ0CP8BT003736 to the list of two bar loosers. FYI I used this dealer and the service writer did mention someone with two bars gone early on, this could be that car.
http://www.midwaynissan.com/used/Nissan/2011-Nissan-Leaf-3e34b94b0a0a00e001f6d15681cc0cc9.htm?utm_source=vtm&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=IMN%20Newsletter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Also, another to add that I didn't want to post here until it went away was owned by a car dealer buddy of my dads. The car came without the EVSE in the trunk and by the time they got it back to their lot it was showing 6 miles range (slam head against wall). I loaned them a box to get it charged up enough to get it to the auction. It was a California car that got sold and brought over to AZ with 1 bar, vin is JN1AZ0CPXBT005035

 

[derkraut]

The thing is, they intentionally packed the first 15% of battery capacity in the first bar, while subsequent bars only has 6.25% capacity. So you can lose as much as 14% capacity and still see all 12 bars and not know that you've lost any officially. Except that you have that nagging feeling that you're not quite getting the same range as you used to get anymore....

Uh....Do you have documentation from Nissan verifying the above assertion? Or, is this just a "guess" on your part? IMHO, this forum suffers more with each passing day from posts based upon conjecture rather than fact.

 

[Herm]

Uh....Do you have documentation from Nissan verifying the above assertion? Or, is this just a "guess" on your part? IMHO, this forum suffers more with each passing day from posts based upon conjecture rather than fact.

You really have to ask that question?.. you have been in this forum for a long time

 

[LEAFfan]

The thing is, they intentionally packed the first 15% of battery capacity in the first bar, while subsequent bars only has 6.25% capacity. So you can lose as much as 14% capacity and still see all 12 bars and not know that you've lost any officially. Except that you have that nagging feeling that you're not quite getting the same range as you used to get anymore....

Uh....Do you have documentation from Nissan verifying the above assertion? Or, is this just a "guess" on your part? IMHO, this forum suffers more with each passing day from posts based upon conjecture rather than fact.

OMG! Derkraut, IMO, you can't be serious! Docs from Nissan have been posted many times showing EXACTLY what Volusiano posted. So, according to Watson, it's fact.

 

[planet4ever]

The thing is, they intentionally packed the first 15% of battery capacity in the first bar, while subsequent bars only has 6.25% capacity.

Uh....Do you have documentation from Nissan verifying the above assertion?

OMG! Derkraut, IMO, you can't be serious! Docs from Nissan have been posted many times showing EXACTLY what Volusiano posted.

Actually, it is a valid question. The table that everyone quotes appeared in the first version of the service manual, and was removed from the April 2011 revision. AFAIK it has not appeared in any subsequent versions. Was it accidentally removed? Was it removed because it was incorrect? Was it removed because Nissan didn't want us to know the information?

Ray

 

[cwerdna]

Actually, it is a valid question. The table that everyone quotes appeared in the first version of the service manual, and was removed from the April 2011 revision. AFAIK it has not appeared in any subsequent versions. Was it accidentally removed? Was it removed because it was incorrect? Was it removed because Nissan didn't want us to know the information?

Yes, this has been a question in my mind for a long time and I'm sure that of many folks here. I wish Nissan would answer that...

And, we know the mapping's going to change via some update in some unspecified time...

 

[surfingslovak]

I'm not clear what you are questioning, the veracity of the table from the first shop manual or the reason(s) why it has been removed?

Please recall the capacity warranty, which was announced last year: three bars or 30%. If you assume that the shop manual table showed the capacity bars as Nissan intended them, then the the transition between bar three and four would correspond to 27.5 to 33.7% of rated capacity. If you assumed linear distribution of 8.33%, identical for all twelve capacity bar, which seems to be the most popular alternative interpretation, then the aforementioned transition would correspond to 25% to 33.33%.

Both alternatives would seem plausible, at least in theory.

Another thing to keep in mind is that it would usually take about a year for the first bar to disappear in Phoenix, but a much shorter time period for the second and third bar. The first bar typically goes at about 80% Gids. The second bar typically goes at about 73% Gids (LEAFfan please correct me if I got this wrong).

I believe that the evidence points to more capacity loss for the first bar, and less capacity loss for the second, third and fourth bar. Likewise, 15% for the first bar and 6.25% for all subsequent bars would not contradict the terms of the new capacity warranty.

 

[cwerdna]

I'm not clear what you are questioning, the veracity of the table from the first shop manual or the reason(s) why it has been removed?

Please recall the capacity warranty, which was announced last year: three bars or 30%. If you assume that the shop manual table showed the capacity bars as Nissan intended them, then the the transition between bar three and four would correspond to 27.5 to 33.7% of rated capacity. If you assumed linear distribution of 8.33%, identical for all twelve capacity bar, which seems to be the most popular alternative interpretation, then the aforementioned transition would correspond to 25% to 33.33%.

I am questioning both.

Right, re: the capacity warranty, I recall Andy Palmer talking about an update to make the capacity bars to indicate what they intended (whatever that is). Now that I think about it, if they're going to update anything, it seems like they'd want to do it around the time the final details of the capacity warranty are released.

 

[surfingslovak]

I am questioning both.

So, if I understand you correctly, the evidence and data collected thus far is not enough to support the table from the first shop manual, and you don't think that it should be taken at face value. What alternative interpretation do you propose, and how do you think will the terms of the warranty change?

 

[cwerdna]

I am questioning both.

So, if I understand you correctly, the evidence and data collected thus far is not enough to support the table from the first shop manual, and you don't think that it should be taken at face value. What alternative interpretation do you propose, and how do you think will the terms of the warranty change?

Oh, I'm convinced that people who have lost capacity bars have capacity loss. I'm just echoing planet4ever's questions "Was it accidentally removed? Was it removed because it was incorrect?" If it's not either of these two, what's the reason it was removed?

From some digging thru the town hall video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=uuPQe23vP0Y#" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;!), Andy Palmer seems to discuss the gauge change around the ~13 min mark and he refers to a field fix. It's unclear what the mappings will be, once that's rolled out. He discusses the update again at ~23:20.

 

[Volusiano]

The assumption of 15% on the first bar based on the first shop manual has been widely referred to in this forum. And we're assuming that Nissan does monitor this forum. If this 15% first bar assumption has been incorrect all along, Nissan would have spoken up and clarify it to squash the supposedly wrong assumption. But Nissan never said anything.

Also, if they pulled this table off of the first shop manual due to an error (instead of due to a desire to without the facts), you'd think that they'd reinstate a new table with the correct values in the second shop manual. But they never did. This implies that they pulled the table off the shop manual just to hide that fact away, not because it was incorrect.