You are correct, in that I should have written:Stoaty wrote:The problem with this reasoning is that we don't have several dozen Leafs that have lost one or more bars in Phoenix. We have several dozen known Leafs that have lost significant capacity. Let's assume that 25% of all Leaf owners in Phoenix are members of MNL (a very generous assumption). That would mean that there are probably 4 times as many Leafs with at least one bar capacity loss (144 Leafs), unless the 25% sample is not representative of the entire Phoenix population of Leaf owners. Remember that of the people Azdre/Opossum know who have Leafs, 70% have lost one or more capacity bars. A larger sample would be nice, but that is an ominous statistic since there is no evidence the sample is biased to contain more bar losers than the general population.edatoakrun wrote:I would not be surprised if that rate of Leafs with bar disappearance by this time, under a dozen rather than several dozen, was about what Nissan was expecting.
Yes, I'm sure there are many more than 37 LEAFs with lost of capacity bars. But I don't think Nissan was, or is, very concerned with those LEAF owners who do not notice, or care about capacity bar loss enough to report, or publicise the fact.I would not be surprised if that rate of Leafs with reported bar disappearance by this time, under a dozen rather than several dozen, was about what Nissan was expecting.
Whoever is selling them is selling them at nearly full price (less the $7500 rebate amount), so it appears the latest round of press hasn't yet affected the used car market for these cars.opossum wrote:That bottom car was skywagon's. It's on the 1-bar list. I suspect the top one was shrink's.
True, Nissan would not care about those owners. However, while a lot of owners may not notice, or be too bothered by, a one bar loss, a 3 bar loss puts the Leaf at "end of life" according to industry standards, and it is likely that most people with that magnitude of loss would notice it and complain. So perhaps 30% will complain about a one bar loss, 50% about a two bar loss, 70% about a 3 bar loss and 99% about a 4 bar loss (in 2-3 years). I think the cases reported so far are the tip of a very large iceberg... and you know what happened to the Titanic when it hit one.edatoakrun wrote:Yes, I'm sure there are many more than 37 LEAFs with lost of capacity bars. But I don't think Nissan was, or is, very concerned with those LEAF owners who do not notice, or care about capacity bar loss enough to report, or publicize the fact.
Yeah, I'm not an expert, so chances that my assumptions about a few degrees are wrong is pretty good. I wouldn't be pursuaded either.edatoakrun wrote:I do not find your reasoning persuasive."azdre"
Any additional days over 100 degrees that we may have had this year over normal, only would extend the heat exposure by 1 day each. So, say there were 10 extra days over 100 degrees so far this year (I have no idea if this is even close to accurate), the decrease in range and the bar-loss that we are seeing may have been postponed by those 10 days (I'm guessing here). Not 3-4 years...
Did you actually expect, that most Phoenix LEAFs would not lose a capacity bar, until "3-4 years" after delivery?
The additional capacity deterioration and/or BMS restriction on charge levels, caused by high temperatures, is overlaid on the underlying capacity deterioration every LEAF is experiencing, due to other factors.
For example. IF the southwest high temperature anomaly over the last two "hot seasons" (AFAIK, winter temperatures are largely irrelevant) has caused each of the 37 LEAFs with reported loss of one or more bars, to each have lost one more bar on average, over that which would have occurred under "normal" temperatures, and we had experienced those same "normal" temperatures, we might now have a list of only nine LEAFs with lost bars, only two of which would have lost two bars.
Most of the other 28 LEAF owners would probably be oblivious to their significant, but less-than-one-bar loss, of available capacity.
I would not be surprised if that rate of Leafs with bar disappearance by this time, under a dozen rather than several dozen, was about what Nissan was expecting.
And I also expect that Nissan is now trying to figure out the most cost-effective response to the unexpectedly large number of early bar losses, and to the hysteria that it has caused.
edatoakrun wrote: I do not find your reasoning persuasive.
Did you actually expect, that most Phoenix LEAFs would not lose a capacity bar, until "3-4 years" after delivery?
Based on what we were told and what is documented "on the record," 15% loss after 3-4 years is hardly an unreasonable expectation when Nissan:Nissan North America Director of Product Planning Mark Perry said in a recent video, "Heat is definitely not a friend of batteries. But I'm talking about severe 130-, 140-degree Fahrenheit kind of heat..
Way back in January of 2010. At the time, Nissan's Perry said, "We don't need thermal management in the U.S. ... We've gone on record saying that the pack has a 70 to 80 percent capacity after 10 years."