Chevy Bolt EV Forum banner

141 - 160 of 177 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,275 Posts
Because Tesla doesn't want 'their' customers to wait in line behind a Bolt to get at an SC session, that's my 'guess'. I for one, will probably be buying a Tesla (especially if I remain in the midwest) because of a lack of charging infrastructure here. And if I had a Tesla and saw a SC station BOLTED over or LEAFED, I'd go postal.
Easily fixed with a 'membership' rate. Tesla gets membership rate to charge, let's say 21 cents. Non-Tesla gets much higher price charging, let's say 50 cents, thus non-Tesla would charge there only if absolutely necessary, like when EA decides to shut down their network on a travel weekend. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: ARob

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,275 Posts
.
 

·
Registered
2018 Bolt EV Premier Nightfall Gray
Joined
·
469 Posts
Because Tesla doesn't want 'their' customers to wait in line behind a Bolt to get at an SC session, that's my 'guess'. I for one, will probably be buying a Tesla (especially if I remain in the midwest) because of a lack of charging infrastructure here. And if I had a Tesla and saw a SC station BOLTED over or LEAFED, I'd go postal.
By that logic, we should go postal at EA sites when a Tesla is using CHAdeMO at 50kW?

I get it, if there are limited plugs and a non-testa were holding things up, it would be annoying. But, the same holds true at any DC site, there will always be a variety of EV capable of charging at different speeds. Even Teslas, if someone pulls in and charges to 100%, you will be waiting longer than a Bolt charging to 80% in most cases.
 

·
Registered
2018 Bolt EV Premier Nightfall Gray
Joined
·
469 Posts
Easily fixed with a 'membership' rate. Tesla gets membership rate to charge, let's say 21 cents. Non-Tesla gets much higher price charging, let's say 50 cents, thus non-Tesla would charge there only if absolutely necessary, like when EA decides to shut down their network on a travel weekend. ;)
I don't think they would have to go that dramatic, maybe 30 cents. Someone would raise a stink with authorities if it were too drastic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,275 Posts
I don't think they would have to go that dramatic, maybe 30 cents. Someone would raise a stink with authorities if it were too drastic.
Yep, and if slow charging is a concern, implement both per minute and kWh fee.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
528 Posts
Point 5, Tesla doesn't advertise. What are you alluding too? Harris Ranch coffee cups and T shirts?

Your last point has been hashed out before but in a nutshell, Tesla survival has been and probably still is a concern. Not as bad now but until the past 9 months, spending money for programs that are further down on the list of priorities would be a breach of fiduciary responsibility, don't you agree?
Think about a company teetering on extinction spending much needed cash to facilitate long distance charging for non-Tesla's when that money would have 10X the return by investing it in their own growth.
Tesla advertises with their SC Network. I believe I read that Tesla in fact classifies dollars invested in the SC network as advertising dollars.

In any case SC sites are completely Tesla branded. You think that Tesla is going to remove their branding, or allow anyone else to brand those sites if other manfacturers come in?
Just look at the numbers. For Tesla to throw money at the public infrastructure that does absolutely nothing to help keep them afloat rather than improve efficiencies trying to keep up with demand would be idiotic.
Spend $10M so that 15% of the EV community can travel worry free or use it to increase production 15%? That's not to say it's a dumb idea, I agree wholeheartedly it's a benefit ultimately but they have much bigger issues right now than what little that would do to advance the mission.

It's really just a blame game. Tesla prints money, they claim to want to save the planet, it's all about working together towards the mission but what have you done for me? You guys tried this with the Generation 3 Destination charger and guess what? It's still open sourced, not tied to the car. It's up to the proprietor if they let you use it, not Tesla.
And to address the original point, Tesla has started to facilitate non-Tesla's at their supercharger sites. Here's a snippet from Out Of Specs cross country road trip that shows the Gen 3 destination chargers which come with the J1772 plug. No need for the JDapter for crying out loud.

Tesla Gen 3 Destination charger at a supercharger site J1772 standard
Tesla has always facilitated J1772 plugs at Destination sites. The fact that they are at SC sites is completely irrelevant to the discussion as no one wants to charge at J1772 speeds when SC speed charging stations are available.

We're actually in agreement here. Tesla would be foolish to invest in charging non Tesla EVs and other EV manufacturers would be equally foolish to invest in Tesla's SC network. I just get ticked off on the spin that Tesla is the blameless altruistic organization offering a hand with the evil non Tesla EV manufacturers refusing to participate in the process. I just wish that story would die the ignoble death it so richly deserves.

ga2500ev
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,393 Posts
Because Tesla doesn't want 'their' customers to wait in line behind a Bolt to get at an SC session, that's my 'guess'. I for one, will probably be buying a Tesla (especially if I remain in the midwest) because of a lack of charging infrastructure here. And if I had a Tesla and saw a SC station BOLTED over or LEAFED, I'd go postal.
You'd probably be as upset as Bolt EV and LEAF owners are when Tesla owners block public chargers without plugging in.

Regardless, this justification demonstrates a complete lack of understanding about how charging works. Keep in mind, Tesla was using this same excuse even when their Superchargers were all split 120 kW stalls, meaning a Bolt EV or LEAF occupying one shared stall would have less of an impact on the other stall than a second Tesla would have. Also, because of the size of the batteries, these smaller battery EVs are going to be spending the same or less time overall than a larger battery Tesla would (despite the Tesla charging at a faster rate).

And when the number of additional Superchargers that could have been built based on the proceeds from selling CCS adapters is taken into account, it would have been a net positive for both Tesla and Tesla owners relying on the Supercharger network, which took years longer to build out than it could have had Tesla been more open in the first place. Strategically, maintaining a walled garden is one of the stupider things Tesla has done. It's an example of sacrificing long-term returns for short-term gains.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
GM isn't doing anything to help it, but they aren't blocking it.


GM doesn't have to do any of that.
Tesla could set it up so that Bolt owners register and give Tesla the information. No GM needed.


GM doesn't want to host a charging network; it's not their core business.
And if there was a way for Bolts to charge at Superchargers, then it would be even less of a differentiator.
With that reasoning, its more important for Tesla not to allow any competitors access to their network, not the other way around. ;-)

GM isn't going to help it happen, but they would do nothing to block it from happening.
If Tesla made an adapter and offered owners to sign up, GM couldn't stop it. With the adapter, it would appear to the Bolt just like any other CCS charger.

I don't see GM jumping on the bandwagon as I honestly think they don't see the need (right or wrong), but they are doing nothing to block it.

desiv
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
It has always seemed to me that Tesla is maintaining a monopoly to some extent with its charging stations and should be forced to share. When they began it was more of a monopoly than now, but still. Not likely I admit.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
503 Posts
Because Tesla doesn't want 'their' customers to wait in line behind a Bolt to get at an SC session, that's my 'guess'. I for one, will probably be buying a Tesla (especially if I remain in the midwest) because of a lack of charging infrastructure here. And if I had a Tesla and saw a SC station BOLTED over or LEAFED, I'd go postal.
Learn that others need to charge as well and deal with it. Also consider counseling/Anger management. Did you not say once that you were a cop at one point?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,572 Posts
Tesla advertises with their SC Network. I believe I read that Tesla in fact classifies dollars invested in the SC network as advertising dollars.

In any case SC sites are completely Tesla branded. You think that Tesla is going to remove their branding, or allow anyone else to brand those sites if other manfacturers come in?

Tesla has always facilitated J1772 plugs at Destination sites. The fact that they are at SC sites is completely irrelevant to the discussion as no one wants to charge at J1772 speeds when SC speed charging stations are available.

We're actually in agreement here. Tesla would be foolish to invest in charging non Tesla EVs and other EV manufacturers would be equally foolish to invest in Tesla's SC network. I just get ticked off on the spin that Tesla is the blameless altruistic organization offering a hand with the evil non Tesla EV manufacturers refusing to participate in the process. I just wish that story would die the ignoble death it so richly deserves.

ga2500ev
What exactly is your concern about having a Tesla logo on a supercharger? There are EVgo and EA logo's on public sites? Are your concerns that people will be hypnotized to by seeing a logo and uncontrollably using their phone while charging to buy a Tesla. I'm truly baffled by this fear of a logo.
I see logo's all the time and seem to resist the urge to buy a Rolex. Maybe I'm just wired different.
At what point should Tesla design the supercharger so that they are so generic you can't even tell it's a Tesla supercharger or a vending machine? It's not like they pipe in subliminal messaging over a speaker. I think you're really reaching on this one.

It's always been my understanding that Destination Chargers had a proprietary Tesla plug which was why the JDapter and TeslaTap were available. According to Kyle in the video who I believe used to work for Tesla, he seemed quite impressed that it had a J1772 hard wired as the handle set. You'll have to show me some source that Destination Chargers have always been J1772's. Is your claim that Tesla paid for a JDapter or TeslaTap to be chained to all Destination Chargers? If that was the case, why are Bolt owners buying them? And if Tesla was providing the adapter, wouldn't that destroy your argument that Tesla does nothing to assist non-Tesla's?

I don't really know what your gripe in your last paragraph is about. How does Tesla offering their Supercharger Network to any OEM that meets the criteria make Tesla a blameless altruistic organization and the non-Tesla OEM's evil? Did Musk make a statement shaming the OEM's for not joining the network?
There's a constant refrain on this site that Tesla is out to destroy the competition and I've yet to see any evidence or source that backs that up. On the contrary, Musk has repeatedly made the statement that contradicts that story that deserves to die an ignoble death. One has evidence, the other does not.
The OEM's are destroying themselves and the results are collateral damage from Tesla's success. Do you expect Tesla to "slow down" so others can catch up lest they become another casualty?


"Tesla is open to licensing software and supplying powertrains & batteries. We’re just trying to accelerate sustainable energy, not crush competitors! "

All I'm asking for is one piece of evidence that contradicts his statement just a few weeks ago. To clarify his tweet, it was in response to this article that stated:

"Tesla’s electric vehicle technology is head and shoulders above the rest of the industry. Now, German car companies who are chasing after them are trying to figure out how the multi-year lead Tesla maintains over other automotive companies can be reduced. CEOs are becoming more vocal about the Elon Musk-headed company’s dominance in the electric vehicle sector.

Perhaps the most prominent relationship between Tesla and a German car company lies within Volkswagen’s executives. VW chairman Herbert Diess is an outspoken fan of Elon Musk and has admired the work the South African Tesla frontman has done to combat the spread of dangerous greenhouse gases.

Despite the respect that Volkswagen has for Tesla and Musk, the German car company has admitted that they trail by at ten years. However, Volkswagen executives believe they can catch up."


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
434 Posts
And when the number of additional Superchargers that could have been built based on the proceeds from selling CCS adapters is taken into account, it would have been a net positive for both Tesla and Tesla owners relying on the Supercharger network, which took years longer to build out than it could have had Tesla been more open in the first place. Strategically, maintaining a walled garden is one of the stupider things Tesla has done. It's an example of sacrificing long-term returns for short-term gains.
Likely true, but if that's the tradeoff, I'm okay with that. All in all, do you really the EV industry to be dominated for the forseeable future by a cult run by a thin-skinned ego-manic?

Right now the SC network is definitely ahead in North America, but there are already places where the CCS coverage is better, and hopefully that will continue to improve with time...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,393 Posts
***

Despite the respect that Volkswagen has for Tesla and Musk, the German car company has admitted that they trail by at ten years. However, Volkswagen executives believe they can catch up."


One of these things doesn't jive with the other...

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,393 Posts
Likely true, but if that's the tradeoff, I'm okay with that. All in all, do you really the EV industry to be dominated for the forseeable future by a cult run by a thin-skinned ego-manic?

Right now the SC network is definitely ahead in North America, but there are already places where the CCS coverage is better, and hopefully that will continue to improve with time...
With the current pace of growth, the Supercharger Network is going to fall behind even in North America very quickly. The 2,700 EVgo chargers that GM is funding is just the tip of the iceberg, and that expansion alone represents about a third of Tesla's entire U.S. Supercharger network. Of course, the only reason it's a "competition" is because Tesla wants it to be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
528 Posts
What exactly is your concern about having a Tesla logo on a supercharger? There are EVgo and EA logo's on public sites? Are your concerns that people will be hypnotized to by seeing a logo and uncontrollably using their phone while charging to buy a Tesla. I'm truly baffled by this fear of a logo.
I see logo's all the time and seem to resist the urge to buy a Rolex. Maybe I'm just wired different.
At what point should Tesla design the supercharger so that they are so generic you can't even tell it's a Tesla supercharger or a vending machine? It's not like they pipe in subliminal messaging over a speaker. I think you're really reaching on this one.
If you are GMs, VWs, or Hyundai's marketing people, you don't want your company to invest money for sites that are advertising for your supposed competition. This isn't from the perspective of an individual consumer. It's from the perspective of a company considering investing into the SC network.

Note how in the VW settlement for Electrify America that VW was specifically prohibited from putting any VW labeling on the sites. As seeminging innocent as it appears, there is significant investment in branding for a reason.

Tesla shouldn't change a thing. But it's a foolish notion to think that any business that understands marketing and branding would invest in a competitor.
It's always been my understanding that Destination Chargers had a proprietary Tesla plug which was why the JDapter and TeslaTap were available. According to Kyle in the video who I believe used to work for Tesla, he seemed quite impressed that it had a J1772 hard wired as the handle set. You'll have to show me some source that Destination Chargers have always been J1772's. Is your claim that Tesla paid for a JDapter or TeslaTap to be chained to all Destination Chargers? If that was the case, why are Bolt owners buying them? And if Tesla was providing the adapter, wouldn't that destroy your argument that Tesla does nothing to assist non-Tesla's?
My understanding, from both my reading and from viewing local sites, is that it's possible to get one 40A Clipper Creek for each 2 Tesla Destination chargers installed. That Clipper Creek has a standard J1772 handle.
I don't really know what your gripe in your last paragraph is about. How does Tesla offering their Supercharger Network to any OEM that meets the criteria make Tesla a blameless altruistic organization and the non-Tesla OEM's evil? Did Musk make a statement shaming the OEM's for not joining the network?
My gripe isn't with Tesla per se. It's with the Teslarati fandom that believes that Tesla can do no wrong. They are the ones who always trot out the "Tesla offered, but no one wants to play with them." argument. I've seen it with every fast charging discussion, including this one obviously, going back several years. It's their mantra as to why Tesla doesn't offer public charging, and why Tesla the company is blameless for that action. Most cannot believe that Tesla the company set up their walled garden not to be breached while offering an excuse why no sane company would participate.

It's not that companies won't participate. Look at Ionity. Or GMs and Nissan's investment in EVGo as examples. But GM, nor Nissan, nor anyone else is going to invest in a brand designed to sell cars. It would be just a foolish as GM investing in Ford gas stations for exactly the same reason.
There's a constant refrain on this site that Tesla is out to destroy the competition and I've yet to see any evidence or source that backs that up. On the contrary, Musk has repeatedly made the statement that contradicts that story that deserves to die an ignoble death. One has evidence, the other does not.
Musk isn't the one that tweets this out each and every time a discussion about high speed charging comes out. He probably made a off handed comment 6 or 7 years ago on the subject and the peanut gallery has run with it ever since without regards or understanding of the implications. That's why I wish that it would just die. The Tesla crowd uses it as a cudgel to tout Tesla's superiority.
The OEM's are destroying themselves and the results are collateral damage from Tesla's success. Do you expect Tesla to "slow down" so others can catch up lest they become another casualty?


"Tesla is open to licensing software and supplying powertrains & batteries. We’re just trying to accelerate sustainable energy, not crush competitors! "

All I'm asking for is one piece of evidence that contradicts his statement just a few weeks ago. To clarify his tweet, it was in response to this article that stated:

"Tesla’s electric vehicle technology is head and shoulders above the rest of the industry. Now, German car companies who are chasing after them are trying to figure out how the multi-year lead Tesla maintains over other automotive companies can be reduced. CEOs are becoming more vocal about the Elon Musk-headed company’s dominance in the electric vehicle sector.

Perhaps the most prominent relationship between Tesla and a German car company lies within Volkswagen’s executives. VW chairman Herbert Diess is an outspoken fan of Elon Musk and has admired the work the South African Tesla frontman has done to combat the spread of dangerous greenhouse gases.

Despite the respect that Volkswagen has for Tesla and Musk, the German car company has admitted that they trail by at ten years. However, Volkswagen executives believe they can catch up."


I expect Tesla to do nothing of the sort. I also don't expect legacy auto to capitulate like the Teslarati out there seem to want. I mean these are folks who really believe that Tesla will eventually supply the entire 60 million car worldwide fleet.

As I've been saying, that if Tesla the company had any real interest in supplying high power electrical connections to non Tesla vehicle, there are any number of ways they could have done that without any involvement from any other automaker. The complete lack of evidence of Tesla doing any of them is a clear indication they have no interest in doing so.

I say again that's fine. Telsa has the right to run any business model they want. I just get annoyed when their fans then go on how Tesla is perfect, blameless, and altruistic. That attitude is what I'm railing against.

ga2500ev
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,415 Posts
You'd probably be as upset as Bolt EV and LEAF owners are when Tesla owners block public chargers without plugging in.

Regardless, this justification demonstrates a complete lack of understanding about how charging works. Keep in mind, Tesla was using this same excuse even when their Superchargers were all split 120 kW stalls, meaning a Bolt EV or LEAF occupying one shared stall would have less of an impact on the other stall than a second Tesla would have. Also, because of the size of the batteries, these smaller battery EVs are going to be spending the same or less time overall than a larger battery Tesla would (despite the Tesla charging at a faster rate).

And when the number of additional Superchargers that could have been built based on the proceeds from selling CCS adapters is taken into account, it would have been a net positive for both Tesla and Tesla owners relying on the Supercharger network, which took years longer to build out than it could have had Tesla been more open in the first place. Strategically, maintaining a walled garden is one of the stupider things Tesla has done. It's an example of sacrificing long-term returns for short-term gains.
I see Tesla's in J1772 spots quite frequently. It's just my opinion that the Tesla user base will not be happy to wait to use a charging station that they feel entitled to and in some cases paid for either in packages or within the purchase price of their car. I don't think you understand the pricing model and how SC access is both charged for and bundled into the Tesla car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,415 Posts
Learn that others need to charge as well and deal with it. Also consider counseling/Anger management. Did you not say once that you were a cop at one point?
Relax Digi, I still am in Law Enforcement. Going postal is not exactly something I intended someone to take literal. Let me rephrase my comment for you; If I had already paid for a charging package at an SC, or it was bundled into the purchase price of the car, I'd be unhappy if I had to wait in queue behind a non Tesla vehicle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,415 Posts
By that logic, we should go postal at EA sites when a Tesla is using CHAdeMO at 50kW?

I get it, if there are limited plugs and a non-testa were holding things up, it would be annoying. But, the same holds true at any DC site, there will always be a variety of EV capable of charging at different speeds. Even Teslas, if someone pulls in and charges to 100%, you will be waiting longer than a Bolt charging to 80% in most cases.
No, the EA sites are clearly for all EV's and a pay as you go type service. It's not the same as the pricing model in the SC's. Night and day difference. Just my opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,415 Posts
Easily fixed with a 'membership' rate. Tesla gets membership rate to charge, let's say 21 cents. Non-Tesla gets much higher price charging, let's say 50 cents, thus non-Tesla would charge there only if absolutely necessary, like when EA decides to shut down their network on a travel weekend. ;)
I like this strategy, but I still think the Tesla community would not be happy if they were behind a non Tesla at an SC station. It's just my opinion, and I see Tesla has tried other programs to charge for SC access. I charge at the grocery store, there are 12+ Tesla chargers, and 3 J1772's. I have never seen all of the Tesla's in use, but I have seen a Tesla in a J1772 spot because it was 'closer' but 12 feet to the store. That is ridiculous, again, just my opinion.
 
141 - 160 of 177 Posts
Top