LEAF Advisory Board, the sequel...

[Stoaty]

Currently our assigned task is to collect feedback on current issues from the LEAF community.

Totally satisfied with my 2011 Leaf except for the defective batteries and the wholly inadequate warranty that Nissan provided (under pressure from class action lawsuit). When is Nissan going to step up and make this right (not ever, I think)? Currently I am on track to hit 70% remaining capacity around 6 years and 60,000 miles in spite of living in an "average" climate and babying my Leaf for 3.5 years. Nissan should provide a pro-rated warranty that would give me a discount on a new Lizard pack.

 

[DaveEV]

Stoaty, what's your current Ah and number of bars lost?

 

[cwerdna]

7) Nuke the GOM. The current equations work to maximize range anxiety rather than indicating anything useful. Put in a very simple fixed EPA efficiency in mi/kwH times the remaining charge in kWh down to VLBW. Voila, a useful readout that does not cause heart attacks going up hills, or bad decisions after going down hills.

Also, consider putting in a phase change material heat storage system as part of the cold weather package. Currently we can pre-heat the fluid, but that only holds so much. A chamber full of paraffin capsules (or similar) would allow the pre-heat cycle to easily hold 2-3 times the heat to better take the edge off of winter capacity loss.

I agree w/most of the suggestions so far, and personally would like to see the GOM go. But, once the GOM goes, I'm 100% sure you'll hear many questions/complaints (mostly from EV newbs or those who refuse to/don't understand certain concepts) of "so, how many miles can I go?" "What good is it that I have x kWh remaining or x%? How many miles does that translate into?" and so on.

I've had enough experience w/people who have had their Leaf for *years* and don't know how to reset the b&w display display or understand certain concepts.

Some people seem unable to learn how to even cycle thru (let alone reset) that display. Case in point is my mother w/her Altima Hybrid. The operation of its orange LCD in the center is exactly like that of my Leaf and basically the same as that of my former 02 Maxima's and 04 350Z's trip computer (1 button to cycle thru displays, press and hold the other to reset).

If you try to explain it to some of those folks, they just won't get it or their eyes will glaze over. And, they might choose another car w/a GOM. The salesman of their competitors will use it to their advantage. "See? Our car tells you how many miles you can go. The Leaf doesn't." :roll:

As for heat storage... the fluid bit seems like a non-issue w/the hybrid heater. As I've posted numerous times, if I turn on the heat on my '13 SV, in winter, by the time I've backed out of my garage onto the driveway, I already have warm air coming from the vents.

The US Gen 2 Prius (04-09) had a coolant thermos (see slides 38 to 41 of http://john1701a.com/prius/presentations/2004-prius_tech-presentation_38.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false, IIRC to speed up ICE warmup. The thermos was ditched on the Gen 3 Prius though...

Off the top of my head, here are some of mine (I'm not going to repeat other feedback...at least not yet):
- make the rear headrests even less obtrusive (good example is Gen 2 Prius, if that's permissible now)
- would like a grey cloth interior that's in between the current light interior and black. I don't like the black interior at all (seats, surfaces, dash, etc.) It looks too depressing. So, I went w/the light one, knowing that it was hard to keep clean.
- add back choice of getting QC + LED and premium package together on the SV (was possible on the '13)
- better aerodynamics (showing in http://www.caranddriver.com/features/drag-queens-aerodynamics-compared-comparison-test-drag-queens-performance-data-and-complete-specs-page-7" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; was surprisingly poor for a car that could really use it for more range)
- get rid of the dumb beeping when you power off the car w/the driver's door open. I don't think my Prius does that.
- ditch the useless range circle button on the steering wheel. Ditch some of the useless voice commands like the ones that will read you your GOM value. Add more useful ones like 70 degrees, I'm hungry, Chinese food, etc. My 06 Prius has all these.
- On the nav system, allow for more choices of visible POIs and include company logos (my 06 Prius has these. Would see logos for various restaurant chains, for example.)

Oh yeah, you probably remember the wants thread at http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=55&t=17821" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

 

[Stoaty]

Stoaty, what's your current Ah and number of bars lost?

52.74 Ah, one bar lost. I am tracking the Battery Aging Model very closely (see my signature), doing only slightly worse than predicted. I hope to get a bit ahead of the model over the next (cool) 6 months, but signs currently are that I am not going to make the 6.4 years to 70% predicted by the Model.

 

[91040]

Agree with Stoaty's points. One reason I opted out of the class action was that I would be over the 60k mile limit by the original court date. Presently have 85k miles, 42.9Ahr and 9 capacity bars.

Regarding the dash display, the information Leaf Spy provides is what should be available.

Currently our assigned task is to collect feedback on current issues from the LEAF community.

Totally satisfied with my 2011 Leaf except for the defective batteries and the wholly inadequate warranty that Nissan provided (under pressure from class action lawsuit). When is Nissan going to step up and make this right (not ever, I think)? Currently I am on track to hit 70% remaining capacity around 6 years and 60,000 miles in spite of living in an "average" climate and babying my Leaf for 3.5 years. Nissan should provide a pro-rated warranty that would give me a discount on a new Lizard pack.

 

[Slow1]

What's next for the board? Is Nissan seeking your input for LEAF 2?

Currently our assigned task is to collect feedback on current issues from the LEAF community.

The feedback is good - keep it coming!

Driving a 2013-S here now for a few months.

1) Get rid of the stupid trees (cute for demo drive, useless for daily driving)
2) Use the space there to show a kWh remaining display that can toggle to Miles remaining based on a user specified miles/kWh. If this were available then I would likely not routinely carry my leafspy phone as this is the key bit I'm looking at while driving.
3) Battery range - get it up about double current and I'll be a happy guy.
4) Cold weather range hit - figure it out and find a solution. I haven't checked, but does the Tesla also experience such a drastic drop in range? IF #3 were addressed I'd be far less concerned of course, but as it is I'm rather embarrassed to admit to folks that my "new" car can only go about 55-60 miles on a cold day (maybe even less - haven't had 'real' cold set in yet!). Sure I could turn off heat etc, but my ICE friends are quick to point out that they at least can be comfortable during their drive. Perhaps better insulation (double pane glass anyone? ha!) on the vehicle could help keep the cab warmer/reduce energy need to heat...
5) Have Nissan Corporate commit to supporting DCQC in some way - jump in on TeslaSupercharger or build your own network. Perhaps provide incentives for the 'independent dealers' to provide these - even if you allow them to charge for it but hold them accountable for providing access 24/7 for all Leaf drivers. However it is done, get some consistency somehow so if I travel I know I can get reliable DCQC stations.
6) Provide details on future battery options for MY car - i.e. could Nissan commit to a plan to provide upgraded packs in 2-3 years with increased range for each model year?
7) (minor) - get rid of XM buttons - make them useful for something for folks who don't want XM radio. Add HD radio or at least make it easier for me to replace my 'stock' radio.

 

[adric22]

Yes, trees need to go. I don't know ANYONE who actually looks at those. Some even cover it with electrical tape so they don't have to look at it.

The GOM needs to stay. Sorry, I know the EV enthusiasts don't like it. But regular people DO like it. I also like it. But I also understand where it get's its information so I know when it is being unrealistic and can adjust in my mind. I'd suggest replacing it with something like the Spark EV where it gives you both an optimistic and pessimistic range estimate.

The capacity (degradation) bars need to go away, at least in their current form. When the car has a new battery, the capacity bars work as a great contrast so you can see where your state of charge bars line up. But once you start losing capacity bars, it becomes more difficult to read the state-of-charge bars because you have no frame of reference. A better thing would be to put the battery health in some other screen that is accessible by the driver, but not always being displayed all of the time on the dash.

 

[walterbays]

Agree with Stoaty's points. One reason I opted out of the class action was that I would be over the 60k mile limit by the original court date. Presently have 85k miles, 42.9Ahr and 9 capacity bars.

I also agree.

I opted out because 1) the settlement didn't offer anything Nissan hadn't already promised, 2) like most I am extremely unlikely to hit the very low bar set by the warranty despite excessive degradation, and 3) the only ones getting tangible benefits from the settlement would be plaintiffs attorneys.

Although like Stoaty I am entirely satisfied with my Leaf in every other way, the battery degradation puts my choice of next car into question. Volt is the leading contender since its battery doesn't suffer much degradation, its real world comfortable electric range is not much less than that of a 3 year old Leaf, it has backup when range falls short, and GM never lied to me. It has drawbacks of course, like maintenance on a gas engine, and that GM deceived plenty of other people in the past.

Nissan's belated offer of replacement battery sales keep Leaf as an option. My best "new" car could be my old car with a new battery. A new Leaf doesn't look all that tempting until there is either sufficient real world data on degradation of the new batteries or an ironclad pro-rated capacity warranty from Nissan on the new batteries.

Regarding the dash display, the information Leaf Spy provides is what should be available.

I thought the original suggestion was to keep the distance to empty display but instead of guessing based on recent driving, just compute it based on kWh times EPA efficiency.

Another option would be to license a neat patent from Ford. It could give remarkably accurate DTE predictions when you had a destination set in the NAV system because it would remember how much energy you used in the past to drive the same route. Up or down hills, stop and go city streets, highways, none of that would throw off the estimate.

 

[Nekota]

Please have the car go to park instead of neutral when the car is plugged in to charge if the vehicle is on.

Have separate on and off buttons to prevent turning the vehicle back on with a double press on exit. This would help reduce the accidental leaving the car on.

Expand the diagnostics panel to include the display of the tire pressures, 12Volt battery, traction battery temperature (or add digital value to existing bar display) and to read the trouble codes. A readout of the number of L1/L2 charge cycles, the L3 cycles and the total KWHr input into the battery.

Add floor mat material or cover to protect the traction battery protrusions under the front seats that are seeing wear from entry and exit abrasion.

Add a selection to the DTE (GOM) to provide historical range calculation from the history range.

Provide a means to add smart phone to the car for navigation, audio, trip log and comfort settings. This would allow for different drivers to personalize the same vehicle.

Bring back the ability for the car to report its location so I can find it in the fair ground parking lot. Yeah I forgot where I parked and row by row searching vs did someone steal the thing? And for the security paranoids it can be 'user enabled only with a security code'.

And as for settings, please make the data permission a one time configuration setting to go with the other settings that are seldom reconfigured.

 

[TomT]

It is actually kind of funny... I've never been on the Leaf Advisory Board, a car I currently own, but I AM on the advisory panel for two EVs that I DON'T own (I can't say which ones)...

 

[Moof]

7) Nuke the GOM. The current equations work to maximize range anxiety rather than indicating anything useful. Put in a very simple fixed EPA efficiency in mi/kwH times the remaining charge in kWh down to VLBW. Voila, a useful readout that does not cause heart attacks going up hills, or bad decisions after going down hills.

...

I agree w/most of the suggestions so far, and personally would like to see the GOM go. But, once the GOM goes, I'm 100% sure you'll hear many questions/complaints (mostly from EV newbs or those who refuse to/don't understand certain concepts) of "so, how many miles can I go?" "What good is it that I have x kWh remaining or x%? How many miles does that translate into?" and so on.

Sorry, I was not clear. I am not saying to get rid of a range estimate entirely, just the Guess part of the guess-o-meter. If the EPA testing shows 3.5 mi/kWh (I honestly don't know the number), and you have 20 kWh left in the battery down to the VLBW, the displayed mile estimate should be 70 miles. It should be a simple calculation, and I would actually like to see GOM's on all EV's regulated to display a range no higher than the EPA measured efficiency would dictate.

Presently the GOM resets to some wildly optimistic number at the top end after a charge. So if my last trip (all recent trips are similar) of steady around town driving was 4.0 mi/kwH and I have 18 kWh of capacity left I should see only 72 miles on the GOM at 100% charge in the morning, but it displays 95 miles. A mile into my morning commute I see 85. By time I have driven my 7.5 miles to work I am at ~60-68 miles left depending on traffic and temperature. So I frequently see a ~20-40% overestimate of range after a charge, and I have NEVER seen an accurate or pessimistic one.

In short, the current GOM is fraudulent, and I don't state that lightly. It transitions from some mythical number that Nissan is fudging to make a fully charged car show an overly optimistic estimate to a near realistic one by time you are at <70% charge. The optimistic efficiency "seed" value in part lead a lot of 2011 era folks hearing and believing the Leaf was a 100+ mile car under normal usage while it got a 73 mile EPA rating, which was actually pretty much a safe and reasonable for an average use scenario.

Next the GOM uses some hair brained algorithm to average in VERY recent driving to revise the estimated efficiency (something like the last 3-5 miles). Every modest hill climb slashes the range estimate, and every down hill re-inflates it. So it is both fraudulent and useless unless you are in consistent traffic and ignore it for the first 10-20 miles of driving.

So what I am suggesting is to make the GOM/DTE display a dead simple Range=3.5*kWh_remaining estimate. The 3.5 should be from the EPA testing of the overall efficiency. If they want to put an algorithm in to adjust 3.5 downward for aggressive drivers, or to account for headlight and heater usage I have no problem that as long as the timescale for the driving efficiency is over at least the last 10-20 miles, and as long as they never use a number higher than the EPA efficiency. Many folks will pump up their chests for beating the range, but far fewer will feel duped for thinking they can actually go the range shown. The important thing is to display a smoothly and monotonically decreasing range estimate that is is never wildly optimistic for normal city usage.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

Keep the digital speedometer. I have become digitalized...

keep the GOM. its better than nothing and there is really nothing else you can add to make it better until we get a MUCH smarter NAV that can apply historical results to the route you have but then again, that would require you to plug in your route every time you go somewhere... too much hassle and WAAAY too much money. they added SOC, so you have enough to get a general idea.

keep returning customer incentives going. The LEAF sales maybe much better but still not out of the woods and the competition has finally started to show up to the party.

And this kinda adds to point #2. Give us more (as if any amount was enough) options! If we want cool stuff, allow us to pay for it ala carte because there is a lot of stuff I don't want so forcing us to buy packages to get one thing sucks and detracts from the buying process.

 

[Slow1]

So what I am suggesting is to make the GOM/DTE display a dead simple Range=3.5*kWh_remaining estimate. The 3.5 should be from the EPA testing of the overall efficiency. If they want to put an algorithm in to adjust 3.5 downward for aggressive drivers, or to account for headlight and heater usage I have no problem that as long as the timescale for the driving efficiency is over at least the last 10-20 miles, and as long as they never use a number higher than the EPA efficiency. Many folks will pump up their chests for beating the range, but far fewer will feel duped for thinking they can actually go the range shown. The important thing is to display a smoothly and monotonically decreasing range estimate that is is never wildly optimistic for normal city usage.

While I agree with much of your logic, I would suggest that your version of the GOM allow users to specify the miles/kwh value to use. Sure, have it default to the "official/EPA" value, but then let me set it to what I would like - if I know I get 4miles/kwh for my driving I can set it to that - if I like a 'buffer' on the GOM then I can tell it to use 3.9 (or less)... if I want to try and impress my friends and leave my wife stranded I can input 6m/kwh and see the range fall like a rock

 

[dgpcolorado]

I would strongly encourage Nissan to try to put "real" instrument readouts on the dash rather than the current comically obfuscated and distorted ones.

1) Capacity bars that show up as equal'ish in size, but vary from 15% for the first one, and 6% for the second one is disingenuous. Readout in linear steps, or better yet readout in kWh available or % of capacity left.

While I agree that the Capacity bars should be of equal value, I think it is worth pointing out that Nissan is the only company that puts capacity on the dash, so far as I am aware. If anything they are likely to make the CB display go away and we would need to go to a dealer to find out what it is, assuming we can believe what we are told...

2) Temperature readout for the battery has such coarse steps that a fair number of people question if it is stuck. Readout in degress F or C, or put in a dial indicator.

Entirely agree!

...5) Please add a speed readout in a dial form (real or rendered, I don't care). Many folks hate digital readouts for some very valid reasons.

Vehemently disagree. I find I greatly prefer the LEAF speed display and hate going back to the hard-to-read dial on my ICE car.

6) Display kWh remaining rather than SOC.

This is actually hard to do accurately because the measurement varies depending on current draws and resting voltages. And the %SOC is easier for the majority of people to interpret, I would think, than something arcane like "kWh". I would, however, like to see the %SOC prominently displayed on the dash, either where the trees are or on the fuel bars. It should be the main fuel gauge. My personal preference would be to display Gids — because it is more granular and reflects battery capacity loss — but that's not something that an average car driver would understand. (I use nothing but Gids on my car, thanks to the Leaf DD that lives on my dash.)

7) Nuke the GOM. The current equations work to maximize range anxiety rather than indicating anything useful. Put in a very simple fixed EPA efficiency in mi/kwH times the remaining charge in kWh down to VLBW. Voila, a useful readout that does not cause heart attacks going up hills, or bad decisions after going down hills...

The downside of this is that it would still be much too optimistic in cold weather. A truly accurate GOM is hard to do but your suggestion is certainly better than the current one!

 

[Slow1]

6) Display kWh remaining rather than SOC.

This is actually hard to do accurately because the measurement varies depending on current draws and resting voltages. And the %SOC is easier for the majority of people to interpret, I would think, than something arcane like "kWh". I would, however, like to see the %SOC prominently displayed on the dash, either where the trees are or on the fuel bars. It should be the main fuel gauge. My personal preference would be to display Gids — because it is more granular and reflects battery capacity loss — but that's not something that an average car driver would understand. (I use nothing but Gids on my car, thanks to the Leaf DD that lives on my dash.)

Hmmm - I would think that figuring out current GIDS remaining is no less challenging thatn current kWh remaining - so how is it superior? aren't these essentially just two ways of measuring the exact same thing?

This being the case I would favor kWh remaining - might as well teach folks the unit of measure without introducing some newly invented "GIDS" unit of electrical power.

In any case it seems clear that what we want is to know how much energy is available (i.e. tell me how many gallons of gas are in the tank) instead of deriving the information and making a range guess for me.

It is interesting, however, that most ICE vehicles for years have simply had a gauge with needle that roughly showed the Full -> Empty state of the gas tanks. No reference to #gallons or miles remaining... somehow folks managed eh? I never trusted these gauges and made a point to re-fill at first convenience below 1/4 tank... IF batteries had sufficient capacity to not require us to regularly take it down to 'fumes' as we used to say then all this discussion about accurate miles remaining etc may well just go away...

 

[dgpcolorado]

Hmmm - I would think that figuring out current GIDS remaining is no less challenging thatn current kWh remaining - so how is it superior? aren't these essentially just two ways of measuring the exact same thing?

It is, point taken. The difference is that I am comfortable with the idea that measurements of Gids (and KWh) can fluctuate, especially when I stop the car and start it again — I see this all the time. This might be off-putting to an average car driver who assumes that such things can easily be measured with accuracy at all times.

This being the case I would favor kWh remaining - might as well teach folks the unit of measure without introducing some newly invented "GIDS" unit of electrical power.

You are certainly correct that kWh — preferably displayed to one decimal (15.7 kWh) — would make a fine fuel gauge, so long as it is understood that it will fluctuate somewhat in actual use. I, for one, would like it a lot! It also has the "advantage" that battery degradation becomes obvious ("Why doesn't my car charge up to 22.5 kWh anymore?")

In any case it seems clear that what we want is to know how much energy is available (i.e. tell me how many gallons of gas are in the tank) instead of deriving the information and making a range guess for me.

It is interesting, however, that most ICE vehicles for years have simply had a gauge with needle that roughly showed the Full -> Empty state of the gas tanks. No reference to #gallons or miles remaining... somehow folks managed eh? I never trusted these gauges and made a point to re-fill at first convenience below 1/4 tank... IF batteries had sufficient capacity to not require us to regularly take it down to 'fumes' as we used to say then all this discussion about accurate miles remaining etc may well just go away...

Yes, the only reason we care about a precise and accurate fuel gauge is that our "tank" is so tiny, perhaps the equivalent of a gallon and a half of gas. If I drove an ICE car with a tank that small I'd be mighty concerned with exactly how much gas was in it!

 

[KJD]

How often does LEAF Advisory Board get to interact with Nissan on these issues ?

Seems like a dang long time since MNL has had any updates from Nissan.

 

[TomT]

Actually, that is not entirely true... If the GOM assumed you were going to continue in the general direction that you are currently going, in the absence of a route entered, it could use roadway elevation data combined with the current roadway vehicle speed received from crowd-sourced, XM/Sirius or Google data to do an estimate of range under those conditions. That would give much better accuracy. If a route WAS entered, it could estimate it quite accurately...

keep the GOM. its better than nothing and there is really nothing else you can add to make it better until we get a MUCH smarter NAV that can apply historical results to the route you have but then again, that would require you to plug in your route every time you go somewhere... too much hassle and WAAAY too much money.

 

[Moof]

Actually, that is not entirely true... If the GOM assumed you were going to continue in the general direction that you are currently going, in the absence of a route entered, it could use roadway elevation data combined with the current roadway vehicle speed received from crowd-sourced, XM/Sirius or Google data to do an estimate of range under those conditions. That would give much better accuracy. If a route WAS entered, it could estimate it quite accurately...

keep the GOM. its better than nothing and there is really nothing else you can add to make it better until we get a MUCH smarter NAV that can apply historical results to the route you have but then again, that would require you to plug in your route every time you go somewhere... too much hassle and WAAAY too much money.

Absolute accuracy is far less important that a readout that smoothly and monotonically drops with as the battery drops. Any algorithm that adjusts the miles per kWH at anything but a glacial pace will drive people nuts. If the display is consistently optimistic or pessimistic compared to your driving style you will easily get used to it and adjust. If it updates the calculation on even a once a day basis your brain has to play whack-o-mole with a mixture of optimistic estimates followed by pessimistic ones. I hate arriving to work with my car saying 68 miles (still very optimistic), and then saying 80 at the end of the day without any charging. I have to do a mental doubletake since I really have more like 55-60 in reality. I wish it would stop resetting the efiiciency estimate to ~5 miles/kwh when I never have or will get that efficiency.

My point in suggesting an EPA efficiency is to make sure that anyone visiting a typical shady dealer will not see a fiddled with car reporting 150 miles range on the DTE of a 90 mile range car. The general savvy of the next batch of buyers will steadily drop, and it could be a real mess. I would like to enter my own efficiency number too, but I see the need for keeping it simple far more important.

 

[TomT]

Using something like that will give you a meter that is almost always terribly inaccurate unless you always drive on a level surface at a constant speed...

My point in suggesting an EPA efficiency is to make sure that anyone visiting a typical shady dealer will not see a fiddled with car reporting 150 miles range on the DTE of a 90 mile range car.