Chevy Bolt EV Forum banner
121 - 139 of 139 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
2,820 Posts
The current administration is so beholden to union labor that Tesla would have to unionize it's work force to get the full benefits of the proposed modification of federal EV incentives, do you think they can get a slice of the infrastructure money without unionizing?

Keith
I suspect only if they agree to install CCS plugs and open their network access to all brands. But, that need not mean adopting CCS as their standard. The two could be used side by side.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
2,820 Posts
How does that hold a Tesla owner "hostage" ?
More importantly, how does that improve Tesla sales ?
How does your notion square with the Tesla offer of a car to CHAdeMO adapter ?

Your reasoning strikes me as deeply flawed, so I'll add my two cents: CCS to Tesla is difficult, and it is delaying the product. The SETEC adapter is good evidence that the problem is not on the Tesla side, it is on the CCS side. EA itself is excellent evidence that CCS is immature. Tesla and its car owners are accustomed to Supercharger reliability and ease of use. Until Tesla can provide the same reliability expectation and most of the ease of use, they delay the adapter.

S. Korea may be a different story if the country has a homogenous CCS supply chain, but in the USA I think there are at least 5 different CCS vendors and it causes headaches.
I think the problem lies in the data exchange. My guess is, PLC to CANBUS communication relays may be a challenge. The CHAdeMO and SETEC adapters apparently work around this by setting a default charge rate rather than try to relay actual data from the Tesla to the EVSE. So, if 50kW is the max safe rate, that is the case for all.

In CCS2 regions, the Tesla BMS utilizes PLC to natively communicate with the EVSE. Is it surprising that this is trivial for Tesla to comply with? No, PLC is the mechanism grid operators use, and Tesla Energy is a big grid operation player.

CCS2 and CCS1 are technically identical, but practically different by virtue of the plug form factors. Thus, using the existing CCS2 adapter, it would seem trivial to make a CCS1 compliant adapter. The underlying question is, do North American Tesla BMS have PLC capabilities? I suspect they do, why would Tesla use a different BMS in different regions?

I suspect the hold up is political. The image Tesla would create is a cake and eat it too one, buy a Tesla and you can charge anywhere, buy something else and you can't.

The "hostage" idea is probably rooted in the fact that they can offer CCS1 adapters, but they won't. Guessing their motivation results in an assumption that it is based on evil intents.

But, maybe Tesla has been told in no uncertain terms by regulators that releasing a CCS1 adapter will subject them to regulatory scrutiny that may eventually lead to being forced to change to CCS and open their network. We mere mortals may never know if Tesla maintains status quo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,810 Posts
I think the problem lies in the data exchange. My guess is, PLC to CANBUS communication relays may be a challenge. The CHAdeMO and SETEC adapters apparently work around this by setting a default charge rate rather than try to relay actual data from the Tesla to the EVSE. So, if 50kW is the max safe rate, that is the case for all.

In CCS2 regions, the Tesla BMS utilizes PLC to natively communicate with the EVSE. Is it surprising that this is trivial for Tesla to comply with? No, PLC is the mechanism grid operators use, and Tesla Energy is a big grid operation player.

CCS2 and CCS1 are technically identical, but practically different by virtue of the plug form factors. Thus, using the existing CCS2 adapter, it would seem trivial to make a CCS1 complaint adapter. The underlying question is, do North American Tesla BMS have PLC capabilities? I suspect they do, why would Tesla use a different BMS in different regions?

I suspect the hold up is political. The image Tesla would create is a cake and eat it too one, buy a Tesla and you can charge anywhere, buy something else and you can't.

The "hostage" idea is probably rooted in the fact that they can offer CCS1 adapters, but they won't. Guessing their motivation results in an assumption that it is based on evil intents.

But, maybe Tesla has been told in no uncertain terms by regulators that releasing a CCS1 adapter will subject them to regulatory scrutiny that may eventually lead to being forced to change to CCS and open their network. We mere mortals may never know if Tesla maintains status quo.
Yep.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Fivedoor

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,810 Posts
Well, apparently, SC may be a problem for all the Tesla going to Vegas on the weekends.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,917 Posts
Yep.

Sad thing is that even though a European CCS to Tesla converter exists for the older Tesla's Tesla launches $190 CCS adapter for new Model S and Model X, offers retrofits for older vehicles - Electrek and the CCS type 2 to CCS type 1 converter exists, if you did an "adapter stack" using a CCS type 1 to CCS type 2 adapter on the US CCS station, plug that into the CCS type 2 to European Tesla plug, and then plug that into this NEW! Tesla Supercharger Adapter – European to US – EVSE Adapters European Tesla to US Tesla adapter then for the low low price of $1059.99 plus shipping, handling, and import duties (92.99 + $190 + $777 = $1059.99) you can charge your American Tesla at an Electrify America station!

Act now, operators are standing by :)

Keith
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,917 Posts
Well, apparently, SC may be a problem for all the Tesla going to Vegas on the weekends.

That price is a lot more reasonable than it was when these units were introduced, but it is still limited to 200 amps, so it seems like it should max out around 70 KW, but at least one guy on the Tesla Motor Club forums reported getting 78 KW. Better than a 50 KW CHdeMO adapter, by a significant (but not huge) amount. I was hoping that this unit would bring pressure on Tesla to provide a real adapter like they are supposed to be doing in Korea.

Keith
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,810 Posts
That price is a lot more reasonable than it was when these units were introduced, but it is still limited to 200 amps, so it seems like it should max out around 70 KW, but at least one guy on the Tesla Motor Club forums reported getting 78 KW. Better than a 50 KW CHdeMO adapter, by a significant (but not huge) amount. I was hoping that this unit would bring pressure on Tesla to provide a real adapter like they are supposed to be doing in Korea.

Keith
... or switch to CCS-Combo. LOL
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Tesla is never going to allow any EV other than Teslas charge at their SuperChargers. Look no farther than the fact that Europe essentially forced Tesla to CCS2, that Tesla put CCS2 cables on their Superchargers in Europe, and that non Teslas cannot use those CCS2 cables to charge.

Do you have a link to #1? I severely doubt that unit is what you think it may be.

ga2500ev
This quote didn't age well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
766 Posts
it is still limited to 200 amps, so it seems like it should max out around 70 KW, but at least one guy on the Tesla Motor Club forums reported getting 78 KW. Better than a 50 KW CHdeMO adapter, by a significant (but not huge) amount.
IIRC the Model S and Model X can reach 200 Amps, but Model 3 and Model Y are limited to 125 Amps. This appeared to be a hardware difference in the cars that SETEC did not expect to solve with software. One Tesla owner tried to skirt the 125 Amp limit in a Model 3/Y and fried car electronics.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,917 Posts
This quote didn't age well.
Ummm, just because Elon said it doesn't mean it is actually going to happen.

Only way this is going to happen is with regulatory pressure. If Electrify America, EVgo, Chargepoint, and other "open" networks are eligible for hundreds of millions of dollars in tax payer money but Tesla is excluded for being proprietary then THAT could motivate Elon to get off his ass on this issue.

Keith
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
237 Posts
The "bipartisan infrastructure bill" includes $7.5bn for EV charging. Electrify America was funded with $2bn. $7.5bn could build something 3.5 times larger. Tesla needs to decide it if wants "in".

In past state-level grants (like Michigan's EGLE and Minnesota's MPCA), you get 33%(MI) to 80%(MN) of total project cost paid for by a grant, but only if the charger has both CCS and a Chademo plug. I foresee a "at least CCS" requirement to be eligible for federal EV infrastructure grants. Musk tweeted that there would be a CCS adapter on-site, but if I were writing the grant limitations, I'd require a full CCS cable, able to reach 4' up either side of the car.

If Tesla could build an SC site at half-price, but only if every stall has both Tesla and CCS plugs, would they? Personally, I think Tesla would do well to participate. If they decline, then I think that would force them to pay out-of-pocket to keep pace, yet maintain closed charging sites. That could cost Tesla a couple billion $, but would preserve their exclusivity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
766 Posts
If Tesla could build an SC site at half-price, but only if every stall has both Tesla and CCS plugs, would they?
Count on Tesla to figure out how to participate in a way that benefits everybody but benefits Tesla and Tesla customers the most.

E.g., the grant can cover expensive infrastructure costs and a few CCS cabinets and Tesla would pay the marginal cost + Supercharger cabinets for a more expansive charging location dedicated to Supercharging. The grant/public money has to pay for basic infrastructure regardless, and this way they get Tesla's expertise and cost efficiency. Up to now, the puny CCS locations paid for with grant money have been obscenely expensive -- on the order of 4x what Tesla pays.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
84 Posts
Was in Iceland last month and Teslas were quite a normal sight on the ring road. Also amused to see them all charging on CCS.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
766 Posts
270 mile up a mountain is no problem? I guess you're driving 25mph all the way. LOL
The peak net elevation gain of 4900 feet is at 225 miles, but your point is well taken.

The Bolt would have to travel those 225 miles on flat terrain and have at least 7.5 kWh extra for the climb. And then limp into LV with about 3.5 kWh of potential energy to travel the last 45 miles.
 
121 - 139 of 139 Posts
Top