2019 "60 kWh" Leaf e-Plus

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.
DougWantsALeaf said:
While I haven't charged at rates above 70-73kW, I would hypothesize that charging at a faster rate creates less heat per kWh of charge. It would be interesting to see heat vs. power at different rates.

Power is proportional to current;
Heat is proportional to the square of the current
 
Astros said:
We got back home last night, so I can finally write up our trip with our Leaf Plus. We've taken this same trip from Seattle to Ashland previously with a 30kWh and a 40kWh Leaf, and in previous years it took us almost 13 hours, mostly due to very slow charging.

According to Google Maps, with no stops or traffic our route should be 462 miles and take 7 hours and 32 minutes. We ran into very little traffic, and no broken or occupied chargers on our trip South, and reached Ashland in 10 hours and 38 minutes. On the return trip, we ran into rush hour traffic in Portland, and two of the chargers were already occupied by a Leaf when we arrived, so it took us 11 hours and 15 minutes.

Friday
Cruise control set to 65-70 for entire trip, except for short stretches in reduced speed zones or for traffic.
  • 8:38am: leave Seattle
    42°F outside, 55° battery (4 bars)
  • 10:49am: Arrive Castle Rock (Webasto), 121 miles
    48°F outside, 68.2°F battery (5 bars)
    Charging: 44.2kW at the start, 29.6kW at the end with 88.3% SoC. 31.18kWh delivered over 46 minutes, 40.67kW average
  • 11:35am: Leave
    48°F outside, 89.6°F battery (6 bars)
  • 2:53pm: Arrive Cottage Grove (Webasto), 184 miles
    64°F outside, 97°F battery
    --- on dash, 10.5% SoC LeafSpy
    41.6kW at the start, 19.7kW at the end with 73.1% SoC. 38.89kWh delivered over 83 minutes, 28.11kW average
  • 4:16pm: Leave
    68°F outside, 114.8°F battery (8 bars)
  • 6:13pm: Arrive Grants Pass (Webasto), 119 miles
    64°F outside, 113.8°F battery
    30.0 kW at the start, 30.2kW at the end. 7.0kWh delivered over 14 minutes, 30.0kW average
  • 6:28pm: Leave
    64°F outside, 114.8°F battery
  • 7:16pm: Arrive Ashland, 42.5 miles
    55°F outside, 116.6°F battery
    20.9 miles remaining to 1% according to LeafSpy
474 miles total (including 9 miles in the morning for an errand)

Monday return to Seattle
My wife also drove two of the legs, and picked different speeds.
  • 9:51am: Leave Ashland, with 96% SoC
    50°F outside, 53.9°F battery
  • 11:50am: Arrive Sutherlin (Electrify America), 121 miles
    51°F outside, 70.0°F battery
    44.7kW at the start, 34kW at the end, 47.75kW peak. 29.7kWh delivered over 38 minutes, 46.69kW average.
  • 12:36pm: Leave
    (I didn't record temperatures)
  • 2:58pm: Arrive Salem (Blink), 124 miles
    The charger by the capitol was occupied, so we had to drive over to the Fred Meyers to charge.
    32.9kWh delivered over 47 minutes, 42kW average
  • 3:45pm: Leave
    I didn't record temperatures, but 8 bars on the dash
  • 6:21pm: Arrive Castle Rock (Webasto), 102 miles
    59°F outside, 105.6° battery
    43.7 kW at the start. 26.03kWh delivered over 41 minutes, 38.09kW average
  • 7:02pm: Leave
    59°F outside, 120.5°F battery
  • 9:06pm: Arrive Seattle, 121 miles
    51°F outside, 114.6°F battery
    41.2 miles remaining to 1% according to LeafSpy

Nice write up. Interested in seeing a relationship between battery temps, starting charge current and what SOC the charge rate starts to drop (knee) You will need to do this again when the 100 KW chargers are available.

FYI; I am VERY impressed with your bladder control!
 
As others have said, I'm not convinced 100kW chargers would have actually sped up our trip. The first charge would certainly be a bit faster, but since the charge taper kicked in even at a 50kW charger I can't imagine you would get long at the maximum rate. Then, if that first 100kW charge session heated the battery more than a 50kW session would have, the second and third sessions would be even slower.
Personally, I would gladly take two 50kW chargers close to decent attractions like a restaurant, grocery store, or park, over a single 100kW charger in a Walmart parking lot. For longer trips like these it's very nice to get out of the car for 20-40 minutes and stretch our legs or get a bite to eat.
 
Quote today from Speak Ev

husoi said:
True but I always refer to the % indicated in dash because not everybody have LSP.
the 2% run was to have an idea how extreme I can go. normally will do a rapid charge when reaching 18% to 22%.
Earlier today had to travel on M25 from Croydon up to Milton Keynes. Unfortunately, I didnt charge the car and had about 25 miles left. I thought I'd charge at Ecotricity right after QE Bridge, but I missed the junction and...oops...the next Ecotricity was about 20 miles away....that was 15 miles more than my meter was showing. I had an option of turning back on the next junction or getting into London, but I did feel adventurous and decided to get to Mimms station. It was stressful. However, despite battery showing 0%, I reached the station without getting to the turtle mode. 5 stars to e+ :)
Was charging at usual 50kW Ecotricity charger and got 38.3kW is 48 minutes. Not too bad I must say.
All in all, good resilience test and great result!
 
Re. the above and a road trip, not a chance in hell I'd take a road trip in an EV. It's still a totally immature technology/infrastructure for this in virtually all of the country, inviting a completely unnecessary degree of stress and annoyance. I have always and continue to believe EV proponents should not even try and push EVs as plausible road-trip cars. Maybe if you're retired and have nowhere to be in a hurry, otherwise stick with a hybrid or a plain old ICE.

I'm still absolutely looking to get back into an EV in the nearish future, but purely as a city car.
 
EatsShootsandLeafs said:
Re. the above and a road trip, not a chance in hell I'd take a road trip in an EV with a smaller battery and crippled DCFC speeds.
I fixed that for you.

Please don't extrapolate from the LEAF and denigrate other BEVs that don't have it's pitfalls.
 
Every BEV, from Tesla to Nissan suffers from multiple disadvantages when it comes to long distance travel. And they are serious enough that these shortcomings will hinder BEVs gaining more than 2-3% of the world-wide fleet any time soon.

For BEVs to achieve parity with ICEs and be considered by the other 98% of the non-BEV world they must do ALL of the following. Every Bev can do some of these items but none can do all.

1. Speed: They must be able to be driven at 80 mph over their entire range. Most can do this today.

2. Range: They must have at least a 400 mile range while be driven at 80mph which is normal for just about every mainstream ICE today regardless if that range is needed or not by the operator. Some BEVs are getting close to this.

3. Refueling time: They must be able to be recharged to at least 80% (concession to the general fragility of BEV energy storage systems) in 30 minutes or less, and be able to be recharged at that speed repeatedly. Some can achieve this today.

4. Cost: They must cost under $30K not including incentives or subsidies. This is the price for the majority of new vehicles that are sold today. There is at least one BEV that can do this, but falls short in other areas. Every ICE that costs under $30K can meet or beat items 1-3.

At the present, BEVs perform at the level of a 1965 ICE vehicle. Their range at speed is rarely above 250 miles when driven at 80, their costs still place them in the luxury not mainstream market, and their recharging performance and availability is spotty beyond urban and interstate environments.
 
80MPH....I wouldn't drive my ICE that fast as the wheels would fall off.

Here in Chicago, the freeways are 55mph. You can do 65-70 in places, but usually traffic makes you go much slower.
 
DougWantsALeaf said:
80MPH....I wouldn't drive my ICE that fast as the wheels would fall off.

Here in Chicago, the freeways are 55mph. You can do 65-70 in places, but usually traffic makes you go much slower.

Ha! In the South, West and Flyover states, Interstate speeds are rarely below 75.
 
OrientExpress said:
Every BEV, from Tesla to Nissan suffers from multiple disadvantages when it comes to long distance travel. And they are serious enough that these shortcomings will hinder BEVs gaining more than 2-3% of the world-wide fleet any time soon.

For BEVs to achieve parity with ICEs and be considered by the other 98% of the non-BEV world they must do ALL of the following. Every Bev can do some of these items but none can do all.

1. Speed: They must be able to be driven at 80 mph over their entire range. Most can do this today
2. Range: They must have at least a 400 mile range while be driven at 80mph which is normal for just about every mainstream ICE today regardless if that range is needed or not by the operator. Some BEVs are getting close to this.
3. Refueling time: They must be able to be recharged to at least 80% (concession to the general fragility of BEV energy storage systems) in 30 minutes or less, and be able to be recharged at that speed repeatedly. Some can achieve this today.
4. Cost: They must cost under $30K not including incentives or subsidies. This is the price for the majority of new vehicles that are sold today. There is at least one BEV that can do this, but falls short in other areas. Every ICE that costs under $30K can meet or beat items 1-3.

At the present, BEVs perform at the level of a 1965 ICE vehicle. Their range at speed is rarely above 250 miles when driven at 80, their costs still place them in the luxury not mainstream market, and their recharging performance and availability is spotty beyond urban and interstate environments.
I agree except I'd add on to #3 and say that a 30 min recharge time is never going to be acceptable for a lot of people. Even 50% in 15 minutes won't do. People don't want to go backwards with technology. Any car on the road today can be refueled from getting off the road to back on it in 3-5 minutes depending on how slow the driver is moving around the vehicle. And that's 400 miles. People just won't tolerate 30 minute stops.
 
Yes, the real achilles heel for BEVs is the refuel(recharge) time. Even at a high volume gas station like a Costco that might have 10 cars in queue for gas, the wait isn’t much longer than 20 minutes. And for BEVs the added insult is that they can’t even get a “full” charge in 30 minutes at a DCFC station.

I don’t really see a solution on the horizon to improve this situation either.
 
OrientExpress said:
Every BEV, from Tesla to Nissan suffers from multiple disadvantages when it comes to long distance travel.

Yes.

OrientExpress said:
And they are serious enough that these shortcomings will hinder BEVs gaining more than 2-3% of the world-wide fleet any time soon.

I disagree. Most driving is local, not long distance. While some do enough long distance driving not to want a BEV, and more might want that capability even if they never use it, a lot more than 3% of cars are viewed by their owners as local/city/MetroArea/what_ever and range beyond that local number isn't useful, needed or even wanted if it costs more money.

How many hours a day can you stand to sit in a car? 8 hours with a lunch break? Then 300 mile range and half hour recharge would work for you: if there was infrastructure. Which there mostly isn't.

Every EV today isn't general case road trip capable. If you disagree, I'll give you a route to travel, and you tell us how to do it.
 
Yes, those of us that have been driving BEVs for years all know that urban driving is the sweet spot for BEVs, but that isn’t where the criticism is coming from.

Long distance travel, no matter how small of a percentage an activity, is how BEVs are judged by the great unwashed 98% of intenders to BEVs.

When we hear Tesla owners crow about their cars superiority it’s all about long distance travel even though it is only marginally better than the LEAFs.

When an ICE intender considers a BEV, for them it’s all about range and where to charge at. It’s an issue that can’t be discounted, and at this point is a detriment to mainstream adoption.
 
OrientExpress said:
Yes, those of us that have been driving BEVs for years all know that urban driving is the sweet spot for BEVs, but that isn’t where the criticism is coming from.

Long distance travel, no matter how small of a percentage an activity, is how BEVs are judged by the great unwashed 98% of intenders to BEVs.

When we hear Tesla owners crow about their cars superiority it’s all about long distance travel even though it is only marginally better than the LEAFs.

When an ICE intender considers a BEV, for them it’s all about range and where to charge at. It’s an issue that can’t be discounted, and at this point is a detriment to mainstream adoption.

Yes, it's as simple as that!
 
Most driving is local, not long distance. While some do enough long distance driving not to want a BEV, and more might want that capability even if they never use it, a lot more than 3% of cars are viewed by their owners as local/city/MetroArea/what_ever and range beyond that local number isn't useful, needed or even wanted if it costs more money.

How many hours a day can you stand to sit in a car? 8 hours with a lunch break? Then 300 mile range and half hour recharge would work for you: if there was infrastructure. Which there mostly isn't.

Every EV today isn't general case road trip capable. If you disagree, I'll give you a route to travel, and you tell us how to do it.

I'd agree with this. There is approximately 1 car for everyone with a driver's license in North America, which means a lot of people own or jointly own multiple vehicles, and in many cases at least one of them is rarely or never used outside of the local urban area. That's probably 20-30% of all vehicles, not 2-3%.

I also agree about the infrastructure problem, especially if BEVs were to become a significant fraction of highway traffic. My road trips take me through relatively isolated small towns where there are 40 gas pumps near the highway and most of them are occupied during peak hours. Extending the refuelling time from 3-5 minutes to 30 minutes means a lot of chargers to find space for, in addition to the question of whether the electrical infrastructure in a town of 5000 permanent residents could handle tens of megawatts of EV charging.
 
Titanium48 said:
Most driving is local, not long distance. While some do enough long distance driving not to want a BEV, and more might want that capability even if they never use it, a lot more than 3% of cars are viewed by their owners as local/city/MetroArea/what_ever and range beyond that local number isn't useful, needed or even wanted if it costs more money.

How many hours a day can you stand to sit in a car? 8 hours with a lunch break? Then 300 mile range and half hour recharge would work for you: if there was infrastructure. Which there mostly isn't.

Every EV today isn't general case road trip capable. If you disagree, I'll give you a route to travel, and you tell us how to do it.

I'd agree with this. There is approximately 1 car for everyone with a driver's license in North America, which means a lot of people own or jointly own multiple vehicles, and in many cases at least one of them is rarely or never used outside of the local urban area. That's probably 20-30% of all vehicles, not 2-3%.

I also agree about the infrastructure problem, especially if BEVs were to become a significant fraction of highway traffic. My road trips take me through relatively isolated small towns where there are 40 gas pumps near the highway and most of them are occupied during peak hours. Extending the refuelling time from 3-5 minutes to 30 minutes means a lot of chargers to find space for, in addition to the question of whether the electrical infrastructure in a town of 5000 permanent residents could handle tens of megawatts of EV charging.

The real problem is a lack of level 2 charging for those renting apartments. Far too many rent as opposed to own and they can't charge at home. If you can charge at home, owning an EV is a no-brainer. But if you live in the city, park on the street, or use the apartment's parking space then you need Level 3 fast charging preferably near restaurants and shopping. If you can charge the car while shopping, eating, or getting a manicure, it's all good.
 
OrientExpress said:
DougWantsALeaf said:
80MPH....I wouldn't drive my ICE that fast as the wheels would fall off.

Here in Chicago, the freeways are 55mph. You can do 65-70 in places, but usually traffic makes you go much slower.

Ha! In the South, West and Flyover states, Interstate speeds are rarely below 75.

Statistics show that most will drive in "Doug-like" conditions with a minority (just under a 3rd) will enjoy the freedoms of an "OE-like" existence. FYI; The OE's are shrinking daily.
 
The same can be said for how many miles of range people actually drive in a sitting. But the reality is that these conditions are what the bar is set at, and need to be met.
 
johnlocke said:
The real problem is a lack of level 2 charging for those renting apartments. Far too many rent as opposed to own and they can't charge at home. If you can charge at home, owning an EV is a no-brainer. But if you live in the city, park on the street, or use the apartment's parking space then you need Level 3 fast charging preferably near restaurants and shopping. If you can charge the car while shopping, eating, or getting a manicure, it's all good.

My rentals have L2 charging. It's just L2. Put a L14-30 in an easily accessible area in an RV/camper box. That how I charge my leaf when pulling my trailer and working on the rentals.
 
Back
Top