Nissan says I can't buy a new battery pack even if I want to

[RegGuheert]

Particularly with a cold battery which really limits regen at higher SOCs, it isn't always possible to arrive at work with 70% unless I am willing to ride the friction brakes all the way down the mountain, which I am not.

I'm having some difficulty understanding this part of your statement. Are you saying that you could arrive at work with a higher SOC if you charged to 100% and used the brakes more, but your strong preference is to charge to 80% and use regeneration coming down the mountain? If so, I'm wondering if the ability to automatically charge to some other SOC, like perhaps 85%, would be helpful. I think Phil is planning on putting such a feature in his LEAFscan product.

 

[TomT]

Yep, sometimes it is simply the breaks as to how it works out! :lol:

I'm having some difficulty understanding this part of your statement. Are you saying that you could arrive at work with a higher SOC if you charged to 100% and used the breaks more, but your strong preference is to charge to 80% and use regeneration coming down the mountain? If so, I'm wondering if the ability to automatically charge to some other SOC, like perhaps 85%, would be helpful. I think Phil is planning on putting such a feature in his LEAFscan product.

 

[RegGuheert]

Yep, sometimes it is simply the breaks as to how it works out! :lol:

Wow! I did it again! *sigh* Fixed.

 

[abasile]

Particularly with a cold battery which really limits regen at higher SOCs, it isn't always possible to arrive at work with 70% unless I am willing to ride the friction brakes all the way down the mountain, which I am not.

I'm having some difficulty understanding this part of your statement. Are you saying that you could arrive at work with a higher SOC if you charged to 100% and used the brakes more, but your strong preference is to charge to 80% and use regeneration coming down the mountain? If so, I'm wondering if the ability to automatically charge to some other SOC, like perhaps 85%, would be helpful. I think Phil is planning on putting such a feature in his LEAFscan product.

I would like to have the ability to automatically charge to 65% without having to go out and manually check on the car as I currently do. Because if I charge any more than 60-70%, particularly when it is cold, then my sustained regen descending ~5000' becomes very limited; partway down the mountain, I end up losing all of the regen "bubbles". Turning on the heater to use up some of the regen only helps marginally. Regularly doing this descent without some sort of "engine braking" is normally considered to be a very bad idea, for safety and brake longevity reasons.

And yes, I could arrive at work with a much higher SOC if I were willing to charge more at home and almost exclusively rely on the friction brakes on the mountain descent. There is a second problem with that, namely leaving the car at high SOC all day long, which is not good for battery life.

My point was, in the absence of workplace charging in my particular case or a super long commute as in the OP's case, adding a bit more battery capacity could make a significant difference in the utility of the car.

 

[planet4ever]

partway down the mountain, I end up losing all of the regen "bubbles".
<snip>
And yes, I could arrive at work with a much higher SOC if I were willing to charge more at home and almost exclusively rely on the friction brakes on the mountain descent.

My apologies, but this isn't making sense to me. If you lose all your regen bubbles then you must be very close to 100% charged. If you get to the bottom of the mountain at nearly 100% due to regen, how could you have a "much" higher SOC at the bottom of the mountain if you charged fully and used the brakes coming down? If you are at about the same level at the bottom of the mountain both ways, why would there be a difference when you got to your work?

Ray

 

[DaveEV]

partway down the mountain, I end up losing all of the regen "bubbles".
<snip>
And yes, I could arrive at work with a much higher SOC if I were willing to charge more at home and almost exclusively rely on the friction brakes on the mountain descent.

My apologies, but this isn't making sense to me. If you lose all your regen bubbles then you must be very close to 100% charged.

When the battery is cold, you have less regen available. At 80% SOC in freezing temps, you will not have all 5 regen bubbles, but you will in 70F temps.

 

[davewill]

... If you get to the bottom of the mountain at nearly 100% due to regen, how could you have a "much" higher SOC at the bottom of the mountain if you charged fully and used the brakes coming down? ...

It's not the same level. If he wants regen all the way down the mountain, he needs to be still quite a bit below 100% when he gets to the bottom. If he's willing to ride the friction brakes at least part of the way, THEN he can end up with 100% at the bottom.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

partway down the mountain, I end up losing all of the regen "bubbles".
<snip>
And yes, I could arrive at work with a much higher SOC if I were willing to charge more at home and almost exclusively rely on the friction brakes on the mountain descent.

My apologies, but this isn't making sense to me. If you lose all your regen bubbles then you must be very close to 100% charged. If you get to the bottom of the mountain at nearly 100% due to regen, how could you have a "much" higher SOC at the bottom of the mountain if you charged fully and used the brakes coming down? If you are at about the same level at the bottom of the mountain both ways, why would there be a difference when you got to your work?

Ray

actually this is not the case and i will post pictorial evidence of this. when quick charging even if to 80-85%, regen is not available for the first 5-minutes after driving off. i would assume this would be due to heat buildup despite only have 5 TBs lit up. guessing there is localized hotspots detected by the BMS but not displayed on the gauge (another example of a gauge that does not do what its supposed to maybe??)

i would have to assume that an extended downhill run would create the same situation since 30 Kwh is somewhat close to current you would when QC'ing

 

[LEAFfan]

partway down the mountain, I end up losing all of the regen "bubbles".
<snip>
And yes, I could arrive at work with a much higher SOC if I were willing to charge more at home and almost exclusively rely on the friction brakes on the mountain descent.

My apologies, but this isn't making sense to me. If you lose all your regen bubbles then you must be very close to 100% charged. If you get to the bottom of the mountain at nearly 100% due to regen, how could you have a "much" higher SOC at the bottom of the mountain if you charged fully and used the brakes coming down? If you are at about the same level at the bottom of the mountain both ways, why would there be a difference when you got to your work?

Ray

actually this is not the case and i will post pictorial evidence of this. when quick charging even if to 80-85%, regen is not available for the first 5-minutes after driving off. i would assume this would be due to heat buildup despite only have 5 TBs lit up. guessing there is localized hotspots detected by the BMS but not displayed on the gauge (another example of a gauge that does not do what its supposed to maybe??)

i would have to assume that an extended downhill run would create the same situation since 30 Kwh is somewhat close to current you would when QC'ing

It can regen up to 40kW even though the meter pegs at 30kW.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

ok 40 KW i can go with. better question, after a full charge, at what SOC does that 5th regen circle light up?

 

[abasile]

I didn't mean to turn this into a discussion on regen on mountain descents, but I can think of countless occasions where I've lost all of the regen bubbles and the SOC is not even above 80% (actually, 76.1%, my current "80%").

Even in warmer weather, unless the LEAF's SOC is closer to 50% or below, the car will eventually start limiting regen after you've been doing it continuously for a while. It's sort of like the taper you get when quick charging, only more restrictive than that. For some reason, however, the car's software is more liberal about allowing regen at slower speeds, i.e., 25 mph.

Best for me would be to start down the mountain with maybe 40% SOC, arrive at work with closer to 50%, then charge to 80% just before leaving at the end of the day. With charging at work, my current LEAF should be able to do the commute for years to come. It's just the current lack of support for workplace charging that has me thinking about adding battery capacity. Hopefully that will change; I've been pushing for access to a 120 V outlet at the very least.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

Tony posted this not that I would do it but...

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=10430" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[planet4ever]

My apologies, but this isn't making sense to me. If you lose all your regen bubbles then you must be very close to 100% charged.

actually this is not the case and i will post pictorial evidence of this. when quick charging even if to 80-85%, regen is not available for the first 5-minutes after driving off.

You guys are right, of course, and now I have to apologize for my lack of sense. My only excuse is that I so rarely charge above 80% that I have very little experience with the phenomenon. When I do it's almost always because I'm making a long freeway trip, and I think, "Oh, right, no regen," as I make my way to the freeway. By the time I get off the freeway the "problem" has taken care of itself.

Ray

 

[EatsShootsandLeafs]

Here is the situation - nearly 55K miles on my 2011. I drive almost all freeway miles about 130 miles a day - 10 bars used to get me 66 miles. It is currently getting me 55 miles. Very soon, I won't be able to complete my commute without stopping for additional charging. I average between 4.3 and 4.6 miles/kwh on the dash at the end of my commute depending on headwind, rain, etc. so I know how to drive efficiently.

I am willing to accept that the range reduction is going to happen. I expected this level to happen at about 100K miles. I don't think at the time of delivery that Nissan had ever said what we should expect other than some level of reduction - I think that came later (the 20 & 30 pct comments).

I have called Nissan and asked about buying a new battery pack. I was told that they are only available for warranty replacement, which apparently I would not be a candidate for. I then asked when I would be able to buy a new battery pack and the CS rep said when the new plant in Tennessee opens and that could be in 2 months or it could be a year. Really? They don't know when their plant is expected to open.

I then commented that even if I was willing to drop another estimated $10K to keep my Nissan car that I spent $30K on, I couldn't and that is how committed Nissan is to keeping a customer. Ridiculous.

My wife just told me to sell it and buy a decent car. I know I can stop and charge up - but with a commute this long already, the last thing I want to do is sit in the car longer at a charging station. Anyone else have suggestions or is this the line Nissan is towing? Now that they have my money do they really not care about keeping a customer satisfied?

Good luck. Although it's of no real help to you at all I think the battery appears to be degrading at a reasonable rate given your huge miles.

That's also an impressive kWh.

I agree that it's really very strange that Nissan doesn't even make the part available to replace. That said this IS a fairly unprecedented situation: how many other vehicles have parts that are functinoing fine under warranty but the owner still wants a new OEM part? They should have foreseen this, though.

The LEAF battery appears to have about a 50k mile usable lifespan depending on ambient temperatures - some diehards will argue - but, that's the reality for most folks.

If you're stretching the as-new range, then yes 50k might be reasonable. In my case I'm in a northern state and although doing 1000 miles/month at 80% charge each day I'm really comfortably within the range, so for my needs I could probably approach the 10 year mark. It is leased, though, so who knows what I'll do.

 

[edatoakrun]

I didn't mean to turn this into a discussion on regen on mountain descents, but I can think of countless occasions where I've lost all of the regen bubbles and the SOC is not even above 80% (actually, 76.1%, my current "80%").

Even in warmer weather, unless the LEAF's SOC is closer to 50% or below, the car will eventually start limiting regen after you've been doing it continuously for a while...

Very interesting, and maybe worth discussing in another thread, IMO.

In contrast, I've never noticed regen significantly limited below 10 bars of charge, though I watch the nav screen energy display, not the bubbles.

But my large descents (of up to ~8,000 ft) typically are on 55 mph highways over very long ranges at comparatively high speeds, using higher regen rates only intermittently.

Starting from home with my smaller descent, ~2000 ft and ~1500 net in the first 7 miles, I can do almost all my braking with regen from 11 bars of Charge, Summer and Winter, with temp bars ranging from 4 to 6. Regen is much more effective in the Summer, but the denser air does much of the braking for me in the Winter.

I can sometimes even get some slight regen with 12 bars of charge in Summer (as indicated by nave screen energy use display) on my initial ~150 ft net descent during the first 0.3 miles of my driveway, through this is preceded with a ~ 12 ft ascent in the first ~60 ft. This tends to occur when I drive in the PM when ambient temperatures are much higher, and after I've done the final charge from 10 to 12 bars some hours earlier, at a much lower ambient (and battery) temperature, and my battery has (apparently) subsequently "expanded" from the increase in temperature.

 

[Reddy]

Yesterday I lost the 1st regen bubble at >36 mph, 4 battery temp bars (outside temps around 40 F), and at a SOC of only 5 bars!!! Approaching a stop sign (somewhat less than 20 mph), the bubble came back. The same thing happened at the next stop sign. So, yes, the BMS limits regen at cold temps, even when the battery is in the middle SOC.

Reddy

 

[abasile]

In contrast, I've never noticed regen significantly limited below 10 bars of charge, though I watch the nav screen energy display, not the bubbles.

But my large descents (of up to ~8,000 ft) typically are on 55 mph highways over very long ranges at comparatively high speeds, using higher regen rates only intermittently.

Starting from home with my smaller descent, ~2000 ft and ~1500 net in the first 7 miles, I can do almost all my braking with regen from 11 bars of Charge, Summer and Winter, with temp bars ranging from 4 to 6. Regen is much more effective in the Summer, but the denser air does much of the braking for me in the Winter.

The difference is that my descents involve much more continuous elevation loss, over a relatively short distance, specifically, nearly 5000 ft. over 14 miles. For the first ~1500 ft. of that descent, depending on temperatures, my regen is typically not limited enough to even notice.

While I understand the need to limit regen in order to protect the battery pack, what remains a mystery to me is why on a long descent the regen kW (as shown on the Energy Info screen) are so much more limited at higher speeds. Near the bottom of the mountain, at 55 mph, my regen kW sometimes drops to near zero, but if I slow to 30 mph, it will go up to closer to 10 kW and stay at that level for a while. Particularly in colder weather, I find myself needing to do the descent as slowly as possible so as to maximize regen. That has at least as much to do with this quirk in the car's software as with the fact that there is less drag at lower speeds.

 

[surfingslovak]

Although it's of no real help to you at all I think the battery appears to be degrading at a reasonable rate given your huge miles.

Is it? While that might be true in relation to other Leafs, I think this statement needs to be put in proper perspective. I talked to a few folks that came from lead-acid-based EVs, and to them the Leaf is a great improvement. Absolutely wonderful. When you ask some owners that used to drive other lithium-ion EVs, not so much. It all depends on your expectations and prior experience.

I looked extensively for any available real-world data for lithium-ion EVs last year, and the closest thing to the Leaf was the MINI-E, which allegedly used an NMC cell from Molicel. The battery pack had no thermal management to speak of, and Tom Moloughney put 70K miles on his MINI-E. He reportedly saw less than 5% to 6% degradation after 2.5 years of ownership in Montclair, NJ. The OP is seeing twice that amount of range loss after 55K miles in a significantly cooler climate in Kent, WA, which should be more conducive to battery health.

Is this reasonable? I don't know. I think we all realize now that the battery is a consumable item. How fast it wears out is one thing, and the replacement cost is another.

 

[DaveinOlyWA]

Now, TaylorSF is stating he is just hitting LBW or 48 GID when getting home now which means he is consuming 281-48 = 233 GID (from new) . if we assume "about" 3.3 GIDs per mile he should be consuming 214.5 GID which means he has lost 18.5 GID or about 7% and this is over say 55,000 miles.

so he is essentially 40 GID or another 14% away from where he would be hitting turtle when pulling into his driveway. given his current rate of degradation, he would not see this until well over 100,000 miles. now, no one wants to see Turtle every day, so he would be 24 GID from VLB (which is no big deal. i have seen it 14 times this month alone!)

problem with all this is he states his GID count was 243 which was measured when it was still warm but that does not pencil out. if this was the case, then he is using about 195 GID or 3.0 GID/ mile now, he states he is getting good performance (which i verified is not that tough to get. we must have "easy" roads here...) so if that was the case, then his range despite what the GOM says would be around 77 miles and at his current rate of degradation (lost 38
GID over 55,000 miles or about a GID per 1447 miles) is still pencils out to over 100,000 miles....

if we calculate his time to VLB he will have about 85,000 miles which i think is NOT RIGHT. i "have" to think his GID count to full is currently higher than the 243.



so, now you got it. what is wrong with the math here?

 

[surfingslovak]

problem with all this is he states his GID count was 243 which was measured when it was still warm but that does not pencil out. if this was the case, then he is using about 195 GID or 3.0 GID/ mile now, he states he is getting good performance (which i verified is not that tough to get. we must have "easy" roads here...) so if that was the case, then his range despite what the GOM says would be around 77 miles and at his current rate of degradation (lost 38
GID over 55,000 miles or about a GID per 1447 miles) is still pencils out to over 100,000 miles....

if we calculate his time to VLB he will have about 85,000 miles which i think is NOT RIGHT. i "have" to think his GID count to full is currently higher than the 243.

so, now you got it. what is wrong with the math here?

Dave, I'm sorry, I don't follow. Why would the reported Gid count not pencil out? The 3.0 Gid per mile you seem to question equates to approximately 4.4 miles/kWh. Steve is reporting 4.43 miles/kWh per dash, averaged from 3 trips over 183 miles. That's pretty close, wouldn't you say? The 3.3 Gid per mile you seem to prefer equates to 3.8 miles/kWh.