Capacity Loss on 2011-2012 LEAFs

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Boy I really feel sorry for the unsupecting new owners who purchase a Leaf from a dealer. Either Nissan is not telling the dealers that the cars cannot stand the heat or they do not care!!! Here is a perfect example of a local Oklahoma dealership. They have 6 brand new Leafs on their lot not only baking in the 100 plus degrees in Oklahoma but with 11 or more bars of battery charge!!!! The Leafs could sit on the lot for weeks totally going against the owners manual as well!!!


LeafInSunFullCharge.jpg



The buyer of those cars will not realise it but could loose a capacity bar within only a few months depending how long they sit in the sun and have that very high state of charge....
 
I agree with locking this thread and starting out fresh with the summary data Tony posted in the new thread he just started. The important information is in the Wiki. Feel free to add, correct or update information there. I did quite a bit of work on it today. Much easier to look at that up to date info than to read through thousands of posts.
 
DaveinOlyWA said:
Perfect example why this thread should be closed and the dis ussion taken in a new dire tion. He has actually mentioned his pack replacement about a dozen times in this and other related threads
thankyouOB said:
Gonewild said:
I had my Battey pack changed in Nov after going through a hot summer. And only the first AC software update I believe.

is this news to just me???

what did it cost?

i am a regular reader and certainly Tony Perry is too.
why do you think we are surprised at this news?
i dont recall seeing it discussed before.
 
I started this thread as a "page 2" to discuss issues specifically pertaining to the battery degradation and range/autonomy issues:

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?p=220120#p220120" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


GeekEV said:
More information transparency is always a good thing, but I just don't see that happening from any corporation really. Speaking of information transparency, 250+ pages is a bit much. I'd like to keep up on what's happening, but the thread is moving too fast and wanders too much. You can't tell when something significant happens from the thread title. Can one of the key regulars involved in this issue start a separate summary thread that the rest of us mere mortals can keep up with? I'm tempted to start one myself, but I don't want to misrepresent anything as I'm not having the issue myself. I appreciate the need for dialog and discussion, but the signal-to-noise ratio is just too low...
 
thankyouOB said:
DaveinOlyWA said:
Perfect example why this thread should be closed and the dis ussion taken in a new dire tion. He has actually mentioned his pack replacement about a dozen times in this and other related threads
i am a regular reader and certainly Tony Perry is too.
why do you think we are surprised at this news?
i dont recall seeing it discussed before.
I think the last time GoneWild mentioned about his battery replacement Nissan did for him on this thread, he ended up deleting his post (don't know why) until he mentioned it again this time.
 
I'm too lazy to quote people. Two things. TickTock has awesome data. But also remember he ALWAYS had some weird problem with his pack since he bought it, so I would be cautious to apply things going on with his car to everyone else's.

The other thing is I still have the original firmware and went through last summer no problem. I have one of the lowest VINs in the list. I'm sorry but this is not a software bug.
 
thankyouOB said:
DaveinOlyWA said:
Perfect example why this thread should be closed and the dis ussion taken in a new dire tion. He has actually mentioned his pack replacement about a dozen times in this and other related threads
i am a regular reader and certainly Tony Perry is too.
why do you think we are surprised at this news?
i dont recall seeing it discussed before.
Perhaps this thread should be closed and new ones should be started to discuss/report on various aspects? It might be good to have separate threads for reports w/no discussion allowed (to keep them clean) and discussion in another. I could see the discussion thread(s) eventually getting pretty long though.

It also might be worthwhile to get some noteworthy posts/threads archived at http://archive.org/web/web.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;, in case someone decides to edit/delete them, for some reason.

Who is Tony Perry?
 
TonyWilliams said:
Thanks for attempting to consolidate this 261-page thread, Tony--it's getting a little ponderous to follow actual developments with this capacity issue unless you are seriously passionate about it. Hopefully, your summary thread and the Wiki can keep us up to date without having to spend the time wading through all these posts. I just don't have the time to go page by page and separate the wheat from the chaff at this point.

TT
 
jspearman said:
Stoaty said:
Azknauer just reported the loss of second capacity bar to me in a PM. Loss was at approx 15 months, 10300 miles. Wiki updated.

PS I guess the loss of capacity bars is "slowing". ;)

Slowing...funny. My GOM just dropped to 76 miles today on 100% charge (it's been 84-86), and the last time I had a precipitous drop like that, it was followed a few days later by a bar loss, so I'll likely be reporting number 2 any day now. Our range is total crap at this point and it makes any weekend trip a nail-biter or it must be meticulously planned to incorporate a charge, or two. Those charges are also stressful, since almost all our charging stations are on ridiculously hot pavement, and the past week has brought back the continuous 7 temp bars. I'm anxiously waiting for Nissan's response, but unless it's satisfactory I will be on board for a class-action suit.

A few weeks ago I posted:

...There is seems to be a trend of lower bar loss reports, since a June maximum. this is despite the publicity campaign currently being waged to characterize LEAF batteries as “defective”, which would likely result in a higher proportion of bar losses being reported, and the increasing trend of listing less-reliable second-party reports of bar loss.

Also note, that the seasonal lag after the Summer solstice means that daily average temperatures have now declined, For example, the last day of 107 F average in phoenix was on July 13.

http://www.accuweather.com/en/us/phoeni" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... her/346935

While temperatures have decreased a few degrees, it is still much hotter everywhere than it was in mid June, when capacity bar disappearance seems to have been occurring more frequently. So if battery capacity bars actually represent a fixed percentage of permanent capacity loss, due to degradation, I believe that the report rate should still be increasing, rather than decreasing.

If this trend continues, it will, IMO, be further evidence that both battery bars and lower gid counts reflect factors other than just battery degradation...

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=8802&start=1890" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Well, so far I'd say that any change in the rate of new reported bar losses is not clear. Depending on the period of time sample you select, probably about the same rate of bar one losses, maybe an increasing rate of bar two losses, no bar three losses for five weeks.

Not much of a trend yet, IMO.

This might be because the assumption I made a few weeks ago, that we could depend on temperatures to track long term averages and continue to decline, was clearly unwarranted.

I think that most of the USA "hot" climate LEAFs, are still experiencing very high temperatures, quite a bit above the long term averages.

You can enter your city at the link below, and enter the nearest city at the top, to see your local monthly reports of recent temperatures, in comparison with historical averages.

Redding CA is my closest reported site.

http://www.accuweather.com/en/us/redding-ca/96001/august-weather/327134" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'll check again, in a few weeks, and post here again, or start a new thread, if the powers that be close this one...
 
opossum PM'd me some information about one of the off-forum AZ people who was on our 1-Bar and 2-Bar lists who has now lost a 3rd bar. The 3rd Bar wiki table has been updated.
 
Yep, and he was one of the "10 people I know." I also heard today from one of the last few who had not yet lost a bar. He has now lost a bar (I asked him for info for the wiki). So my updated list...

(updated #1 & #9)...

1. 3 bars
2. 2 bars
3. 2 bars
4. 1 bar
5. 1 bar
6. 1 bar
7. 1 bar (then sold car)
8. on the cusp of losing 1 bar
9. 1 bar
10. No known capacity loss. 80% charges, owned 1 year, only 5000 miles driven

So...

80% already lost 1 to 3 bars
10% just about lost 1 bar
10% no known loss w/ 80% charges in 1yr/5k

Background: There are 10 people (including my wife) I knew before they purchased Leafs (or met immediately after they purchased their Leafs). I did not meet any of these people *because* they began complaining of capacity/range issues. I simply met them before or immediately after they purchased Leafs. And now, 9 to 15 months later, let's check in on those 10 cars (all here in Phoenix) and see whether they have lost any capacity...
 
Wow you found a Leaf with 12 capacity bars showing :shock:
dusty2050 said:
Boy I really feel sorry for the unsupecting new owners who purchase a Leaf from a dealer. Either Nissan is not telling the dealers that the cars cannot stand the heat or they do not care!!! Here is a perfect example of a local Oklahoma dealership. They have 6 brand new Leafs on their lot not only baking in the 100 plus degrees in Oklahoma but with 11 or more bars of battery charge!!!! The Leafs could sit on the lot for weeks totally going against the owners manual as well!!!


LeafInSunFullCharge.jpg



The buyer of those cars will not realise it but could loose a capacity bar within only a few months depending how long they sit in the sun and have that very high state of charge....
 
just completed first "warm weather charge" on the LEAF and registered lowest ever GID count of 268. started charge at 11 am. finished 2:50. Sun is out, day is warm. thermometer measures 31C or about 88F.

previous low GID count EVER is 274. average 275-276. so guessing this is temporary temperature adjusted degradation or could be the start of the same rapid degradation that everyone has
 
I did the same experiment last week. 100% charge had a Gidcount of 264,265 and 266 on three days.. charge is at night (temperature in 60s). I am in Portland Oregon. 9650 miles and 1year 2 months old car.
 
chennu said:
I did the same experiment last week. 100% charge had a Gidcount of 264,265 and 266 on three days.. charge is at night (temperature in 60s). I am in Portland Oregon. 9650 miles and 1year 2 months old car.


you charged at night?? oh oh. i charged in the middle of the afternoon in full Sun. after all, it does not get THAT hot here normally. my charge time was from 11 AM to 2:50 PM
 
TonyWilliams said:
cwerdna said:
Perhaps this thread should be closed and new ones should be started to discuss/report on various aspects?

There's so much chatter here, that you passed right over my post above !!!! I started a thread as a "page 2" to discuss issues specifically pertaining to the battery degradation and range/autonomy issues:

Click here for the Summary
Actually, before I posted, I did glance at the 1st post of your other thread.

At the time, I wasn't sure how that thread would differ from this one. What's the criteria that someone should use to post there vs. here? Is everyone else clear why a post should go here vs. the other thread?

The lemon law stuff you posted is semi-interesting, but it might be a tough battle given that Nissan doesn't warrant capacity at all and Nissan seems to indicate the degradation is "normal". Usually (always?), when lemon laws are involved, it's related to warranty repairs.
 
DaveinOlyWA said:
just completed first "warm weather charge" on the LEAF and registered lowest ever GID count of 268. started charge at 11 am. finished 2:50. Sun is out, day is warm. thermometer measures 31C or about 88F.

previous low GID count EVER is 274. average 275-276. so guessing this is temporary temperature adjusted degradation or could be the start of the same rapid degradation that everyone has

Or, if TickTock's conclusion that gid/Wh values vary is correct, it could be that "everyone" watching their gid counts, might have far less reduction (either temporary or permanent) of battery capacity than belief in a constant ~80 Wh gid value would indicate, and concluding that a dropping gid count occurring with warmer temperatures indicates "rapid degradation", may be erroneous.

TickTock

...although 80Wh may be the nominal target for 1 gid, it can be off by as much as 10%. Just something to keep in mind if you are counting gids...

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=44&t=9689" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
edatoakrun said:
Or, if TickTock's conclusion that gid/Wh values vary is correct, it could be that "everyone" watching their gid counts, might have far less reduction (either temporary or permanent) of battery capacity than belief in a constant ~80 Wh gid value would indicate, and concluding that a dropping gid count occurring with warmer temperatures indicates "rapid degradation", may be erroneous.
Right, and I never missed an opportunity to point out that not all the Gid count loss we see is permanent degradation. The data from Casa Grande seems to support that notion.

However, I would not go as far as saying that the observed "rapid degradation" is erroneous. Even 15%, a number that reportedly came from Nissan, after one year is very significant. It's nearly unheard of in comparable lithium-ion EVs, at least in my experience. This figure would be OK as an outlier, but not if a significant number of owners experienced it.

As to the perceived or overstated loss of range: the last Gid count on my vehicle was down 5% and the range was down 8 to 10%. I determined the range through three carefully executed tests from 100% all the way to turtle. According to the temperature profiling we discussed recently, I would expect the battery to age at about half or little less than half the speed owners Phoenix are experiencing in my local climate. I believe that the numbers I'm observing are consistent with that.
1
 
Back
Top