stjohnh
Posts: 321
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:27 pm
Delivery Date: 10 Jun 2013
Leaf Number: 409675
Location: Palo Alto, CA

Re: 2013 Low Battery Capacity AHr Battery Degradation

Thu Oct 31, 2013 9:41 am

goaliepride wrote:I know it's due to a battery change, but I wish I had a leaf battery app that reflected MY battery.


Me too!!
Remember that no one (outside of Nissan) knows what the H-factor (probably mis-named health) actually represents. Even what is called capacity is probably not actual capacity, especially for 2013 Leafs. These numbers are provided by the car's computer and smart programmers on these forums have provided a way for us to get this data, but Nissan doesn't tell us what the numbers actually mean. All reverse engineered.
Blessings,
Holland

2 LEAFS, bought 1 week apart. 2013 S for me, 2013 SV is wife's. Both manufactured May 2013, both battery capacity about 60.5 AHr. Both with normal range. No degradation after 2 years and 19,000 miles.

goaliepride
Posts: 90
Joined: Mon Sep 30, 2013 9:25 am
Delivery Date: 30 Sep 2013
Location: San Diego, CA
Contact: Website

Re: 2013 Low Battery Capacity AHr Battery Degradation

Thu Oct 31, 2013 9:50 am

stjohnh wrote:
goaliepride wrote:I know it's due to a battery change, but I wish I had a leaf battery app that reflected MY battery.


Me too!!
Remember that no one (outside of Nissan) knows what the H-factor (probably mis-named health) actually represents. Even what is called capacity is probably not actual capacity, especially for 2013 Leafs. These numbers are provided by the car's computer and smart programmers on these forums have provided a way for us to get this data, but Nissan doesn't tell us what the numbers actually mean. All reverse engineered.


For sure =)
2013 SV w/Charge & Headlight package
http://theevlife.wordpress.com/

edatoakrun
Posts: 5222
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:33 am
Delivery Date: 15 May 2011
Leaf Number: 2184
Location: Shasta County, North California

Re: 2013 Low Battery Capacity AHr Battery Degradation

Thu Oct 31, 2013 10:02 am

stjohnh wrote:
goaliepride wrote:I know it's due to a battery change, but I wish I had a leaf battery app that reflected MY battery.


Me too!!
Remember that no one (outside of Nissan) knows what the H-factor (probably mis-named health) actually represents. Even what is called capacity is probably not actual capacity, especially for 2013 Leafs. These numbers are provided by the car's computer and smart programmers on these forums have provided a way for us to get this data, but Nissan doesn't tell us what the numbers actually mean. All reverse engineered.


And even these capacity numbers can not directly reflect battery "degradation", but can only report (very inaccurately, obviously) the kWh storage in your battery your LBC is currently allowing you to access between any low SOC point and "100%".

Which is why the obsessive preoccupation by some with these numbers is, IMO, unwarranted.

If you really want to know what your actual present available battery capacity is, do a discharge (range) test, or a recharge (metered or timed) test.

Both of these have their own inherent uncertainties, but both likely far less inaccurate than the LBC reports.
no condition is permanent

Stoaty
Posts: 4467
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 9:50 pm
Delivery Date: 12 Jun 2011
Leaf Number: 3871
Location: West Los Angeles

Re: 2013 Low Battery Capacity AHr Battery Degradation

Thu Oct 31, 2013 10:17 am

edatoakrun wrote:And even these capacity numbers can not directly reflect battery "degradation", but can only report (very inaccurately, obviously) the kWh storage in your battery your LBC is currently allowing you to access between any low SOC point and "100%".

Which is why the obsessive preoccupation by some with these numbers is, IMO, unwarranted.

Well, Nissan has said that the previous firmware gave inaccurate (too pessimistic) numbers and that was what the P3227 update addresses. The number tells you when Nissan would replace your battery under warranty. It is hard for me to believe that Nissan would produce an update which would grossly over estimate capacity loss, thus forcing them to provide more warranty replacements. If you want to believe that is what they are doing that is up to you.
2011 Leaf with 62,000 miles given to Nephew
2013 Tesla Model S85 with 251 miles rated range at full charge
Leaf Spy Manual
Battery Aging Model Spreadsheet

edatoakrun
Posts: 5222
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:33 am
Delivery Date: 15 May 2011
Leaf Number: 2184
Location: Shasta County, North California

Re: 2013 Low Battery Capacity AHr Battery Degradation

Thu Oct 31, 2013 11:05 am

Stoaty wrote:
edatoakrun wrote:And even these capacity numbers can not directly reflect battery "degradation", but can only report (very inaccurately, obviously) the kWh storage in your battery your LBC is currently allowing you to access between any low SOC point and "100%".

Which is why the obsessive preoccupation by some with these numbers is, IMO, unwarranted.

Well, Nissan has said that the previous firmware gave inaccurate (too pessimistic) numbers and that was what the P3227 update addresses. The number tells you when Nissan would replace your battery under warranty. It is hard for me to believe that Nissan would produce an update which would grossly over estimate capacity loss, thus forcing them to provide more warranty replacements. If you want to believe that is what they are doing that is up to you.


Actually, I believe that LEAF drivers who were briefed in Phoenix have stated that Nissan has recently changed its story, and now says pre-P3277 reports could understate or overstate (being either optimistic or pessimistic) capacity by up to 10%, and that post p3227 (and all 2013 LEAFs) will now only report only pessimistically, and within 4% of actual capacity.

But since Nissan has never put any of this in writing, or even ever stated what the "100%"-to-dead available capacity in kWh is for a LEAF, only publically stating that four capacity bars loss is ~ 30% loss of whatever that new available capacity is, I think it is very likely that Nissan will not be overly concerned with warranty costs, and much more likely to be concerned with having any pesky lawsuits answering those questions that it has chosen to avoid answering itself.
no condition is permanent

bradbissell
Posts: 265
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 5:47 am
Delivery Date: 29 Mar 2013
Leaf Number: 404629
Location: Boston, MA

Re: 2013 Low Battery Capacity AHr Battery Degradation

Mon Dec 02, 2013 10:02 am

Very interested to hear if other people are having the same performance from a 2013. After nearly 10k miles I am looking at a SOH value of 99.


Code: Select all

Date       Ahr      %CAP    %SOC  SOH     Hx      GIDS    V Max   mv Delta   Max Batt Temp F     Total Miles
6/24/13   66.850  101.905  97.100                         4.135    10.000     80.000
7/22/13   67.050  102.210  96.900       103.090    283    4.125     9.000     79.500
8/1/13    66.150  100.838  97.100       101.400    284    4.128     9.000     78.800               4960
8/12/13   65.810  100.320  96.800       100.760    283    4.128    12.000     68.900               5443
8/28/13   65.220   99.421  97.100        99.760    283    4.134     9.000     75.200               6166
9/6/13    65.370   99.649  96.800        99.960    283    4.113    11.000     67.100               6415
9/18/13   65.090   99.223  97.000        99.590    283    4.125    14.000     58.100               6879
9/26/13   63.580   96.921  96.700        97.610    274    4.132    12.000     63.900               7223
9/27/13   64.090   97.698  97.000        98.270    278    4.121    10.000     70.000               7274
10/10/13  63.020   96.067  96.800        96.870    272    4.130    11.000     56.500               7706
10/23/13  64.990   99.070  96.900        99.460    282    4.128     9.000     59.200               8303
11/26/13  64.900   98.933  97.200  99.0  99.340    281    4.130    11.000     50.500               9575 
Silver/Black 2013 SV Manufactured, Leased March '13, Returned Dec '15
Silver/Dark Ash 2016 Volt LT

stjohnh
Posts: 321
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:27 pm
Delivery Date: 10 Jun 2013
Leaf Number: 409675
Location: Palo Alto, CA

Re: 2013 Low Battery Capacity AHr Battery Degradation

Mon Dec 02, 2013 12:05 pm

bradbissell wrote:Very interested to hear if other people are having the same performance from a 2013. After nearly 10k miles I am looking at a SOH value of 99.


Code: Select all

Date       Ahr      %CAP    %SOC  SOH     Hx      GIDS    V Max   mv Delta   Max Batt Temp F     Total Miles
6/24/13   66.850  101.905  97.100                         4.135    10.000     80.000
7/22/13   67.050  102.210  96.900       103.090    283    4.125     9.000     79.500
8/1/13    66.150  100.838  97.100       101.400    284    4.128     9.000     78.800               4960
8/12/13   65.810  100.320  96.800       100.760    283    4.128    12.000     68.900               5443
8/28/13   65.220   99.421  97.100        99.760    283    4.134     9.000     75.200               6166
9/6/13    65.370   99.649  96.800        99.960    283    4.113    11.000     67.100               6415
9/18/13   65.090   99.223  97.000        99.590    283    4.125    14.000     58.100               6879
9/26/13   63.580   96.921  96.700        97.610    274    4.132    12.000     63.900               7223
9/27/13   64.090   97.698  97.000        98.270    278    4.121    10.000     70.000               7274
10/10/13  63.020   96.067  96.800        96.870    272    4.130    11.000     56.500               7706
10/23/13  64.990   99.070  96.900        99.460    282    4.128     9.000     59.200               8303
11/26/13  64.900   98.933  97.200  99.0  99.340    281    4.130    11.000     50.500               9575 


Looks like you have one of the last of the Japanese Leafs, those made May 2013 or later I think are all made in Smyrna, and those are the ones that have new capacities in the 59-61 range.
Blessings,
Holland

2 LEAFS, bought 1 week apart. 2013 S for me, 2013 SV is wife's. Both manufactured May 2013, both battery capacity about 60.5 AHr. Both with normal range. No degradation after 2 years and 19,000 miles.

Berlino
Posts: 661
Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2013 2:28 am
Delivery Date: 05 Aug 2013
Leaf Number: 412600
Location: Quebec City, Canada

Re: 2013 Low Battery Capacity AHr Battery Degradation

Mon Dec 02, 2013 3:35 pm

stjohnh wrote:
Looks like you have one of the last of the Japanese Leafs, those made May 2013 or later I think are all made in Smyrna, and those are the ones that have new capacities in the 59-61 range.


What are your current readings, stjohnh?

After 4700 miles my Smryna LEAF is showing

AHr: 61.40 (Low in October of 60.36, Delivered with 61.x, High of 63.99 three weeks into ownership)
Hx: 94.59% (Low 93.03%, Delivered 95.x%, High 97.89%)
SOH: 93%
Gids @ 100%: 267 (Low 263, Delivered 264, High 276)

Edit: fwiw, I didn't notice any problems with range, at least before temps dropped and I had to change tires.


Manufactured in June, so this is my first winter with the LEAF. From what I read here, I expected AHr and Hx to creep up over the Winter, but they've been frozen for a month, ever since the temperature has dropped to the upper 30s or below.

Nov 1: AHr 61.26, Hx 94.32%. Then no change until after a charge to 100% on Nov 7: AHr 61.40, Hx 94.60%. Since then AHr has not changed and Hx has moved once, by a whopping 0.01%.
Ordered: 7/18/13 Delivered: 8/05/13
Red 2013 SL w/premium
EVSE Upgrade, LEAF Spy Pro
Michelin X-Ice Xi3 FIVE months per year.
--------------------------------------
Silver S85.
Selected from inventory w ~500 miles: 3/28/14
Delivered: 3/31/14

stjohnh
Posts: 321
Joined: Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:27 pm
Delivery Date: 10 Jun 2013
Leaf Number: 409675
Location: Palo Alto, CA

Re: 2013 Low Battery Capacity AHr Battery Degradation

Mon Dec 02, 2013 5:00 pm

Berlino wrote:
stjohnh wrote:
Looks like you have one of the last of the Japanese Leafs, those made May 2013 or later I think are all made in Smyrna, and those are the ones that have new capacities in the 59-61 range.


What are your current readings, stjohnh?
%.


S Has 59.42. Was 60.40 when first measured in July
SV Has 61.40. Was 60.30 in July

I seriously doubt that the better current reading in the SV is due to the battery actually gaining capacity. Much more likely is that these numbers just don't acurrately reflect real capacity.
Blessings,
Holland

2 LEAFS, bought 1 week apart. 2013 S for me, 2013 SV is wife's. Both manufactured May 2013, both battery capacity about 60.5 AHr. Both with normal range. No degradation after 2 years and 19,000 miles.

IraqiInvaderGnr
Posts: 95
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 4:49 pm
Delivery Date: 01 Apr 2013
Leaf Number: 404138
Location: Treynor, Iowa

Re: 2013 Low Battery Capacity AHr Battery Degradation

Tue Dec 03, 2013 5:06 am

284 Gids at 100% charge AHR 67.36 SOH 100% Health 110.71% odo 12, ,800 921 L1/L2s. I drive 50 miles round trip to work every day.
2013 SL Silver Manufactured 02-13 Purchased 04-13
Top Gids 295 miles 7-25-13 6,700
AHr 62.73 Health 95.01% Gids 272 miles as of 9-8-14 28,287

:) Truck driver that dreams of a day when he's behind the wheel of a Electric 18 wheeler :)

Return to “Range / Efficiency / Carwings”