Chevy Bolt EV Forum banner

1 - 20 of 518 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
670 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
First coming to South Korea, then the states? Good idea.


Rich
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,895 Posts
I doubt it's coming to the United States anytime soon. It appears that Tesla's refusal to provide a CCS1-Tesla adapter is purposeful, and while hate to assign motives, none of the reasons are in the best interests of their customers. The only reason it appears that Tesla is releasing an adapter for the Korean market is because a Korean company is about to release a third-party CCS adapter. This effort looks like an attempt to preempt that third-party adapter and kill it off while it is still in the development and preorder stage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
727 Posts
I doubt it's coming to the United States anytime soon. It appears that Tesla's refusal to provide a CCS1-Tesla adapter is purposeful, and while hate to assign motives, none of the reasons are in the best interests of their customers. The only reason it appears that Tesla is releasing an adapter for the Korean market is because a Korean company is about to release a third-party CCS adapter. This effort looks like an attempt to preempt that third-party adapter and kill it off while it is still in the development and preorder stage.
Too late. The third party Korean adapter is already for sale in the US. And I really don't know why Tesla would care (as long as it doesn't harm the car). If a Tesla owner is charging at a CCS, then that frees up a spot at a Tesla supercharger for someone else.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,895 Posts
Too late. The third party Korean adapter is already for sale in the US. And I really don't know why Tesla would care (as long as it doesn't harm the car). If a Tesla owner is charging at a CCS, then that frees up a spot at a Tesla supercharger for someone else.
That's the one I just referenced, and as I noted, it hasn't gone on sale yet (you are making a preorder). According to the website, they are still in the process of producing the first 1,000 units.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,895 Posts
And I really don't know why Tesla would care (as long as it doesn't harm the car). If a Tesla owner is charging at a CCS, then that frees up a spot at a Tesla supercharger for someone else.
Also, I think you are underestimating the amount of damage this could do to Tesla in North America. My statement about "not coming to North America anytime soon" was a reference to the Tesla CCS adapter, not the third-party adapter, which will be limited to 80 kW (and is far less of a threat as a result). The damage to Tesla would come in the form of a 350 to 500 A CCS1-Tesla adapter that would be compelling enough for Tesla owners to bypass Superchargers in favor of public DCFC.

The reasons this harms Tesla are: A) It undermines the current narrative that no non-Tesla EVs are worth considering because they are limited by the public charging infrastructure availability (as a result, improving sales of non-Tesla EVs and increasing the likelihood that current Tesla owners consider non-Tesla EVs in the future); B) It has the potential to reduce the Supercharger Network usage to the point that demand charges make the sites unprofitable; and C) It has the potential to increase usage of public charging sites to the point that they become profitable (as a result, increasing growth and expansion of competing networks).

Again, none of those are justifications for hurting their own customers; however, Tesla as a company does not benefit at all by providing their North American customers the option of charging at public CCS chargers. It takes money out of Tesla's pocket, makes the Superchargers more costly to run, and it increases the possibility that Tesla owners consider other brands for future EV purchases.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
670 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
"My statement about "not coming to North America anytime soon" was a reference to the Tesla CCS adapter, not the third-party adapter, which will be limited to 80 kW..."

So, Eric, you are saying these adapters will only be useful for charging up to 80kW? How would the internal charger of the Tesla be able to sort that out?

Rich
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,895 Posts
"My statement about "not coming to North America anytime soon" was a reference to the Tesla CCS adapter, not the third-party adapter, which will be limited to 80 kW..."

So, Eric, you are saying these adapters will only be useful for charging up to 80kW? How would the internal charger of the Tesla be able to sort that out?

Rich
The SETEC Power charger is limited to 200 A, which is actually the same power level as the Tesla "Urban" Superchargers, so realistically, Tesla owners will see a max charging rate using the third-party CCS adapter of ~72 kW.

That being said, these are still DC charging adapters, so the Tesla's internal charger would play no roll in the charging process. The DC power would be fed directly to the Tesla's battery the same way it is when Supercharging. The only difference is in the communication protocol.

Now, unless Tesla did something different for the European Model 3s (beyond just the CCS socket), it appears that the Model 3 is natively CCS compatible (meaning it can communicate directly with CCS chargers). Even if it weren't, the SETEC unit appears to have an integrated Powerline Control module, which would act as a translator between the CCS charger and Tesla's BMS and other onboard systems. In Europe, the Model S/X require a separate Powerline Communication module to be installed in order for them to use the CCS2-Tesla adapter.

This new "dumb" adapter that Tesla will be providing in Korea looks just like the European CCS2 adapter they made, so Korean Model S/X owners will likely need to have the Powerline Control module installed as well. If Model 3 owners can use the adapter without that separate installation, it would prove that the Model 3 is natively compatible with CCS (i.e., it only requires the physical adapter).
 

·
Registered
2017 Bolt EV LT purchased used, previous vehicle was a 2015 Chevy eSpark
Joined
·
176 Posts
The reasons this harms Tesla are: A) It undermines the current narrative that no non-Tesla EVs are worth considering because they are limited by the public charging infrastructure availability (as a result, improving sales of non-Tesla EVs and increasing the likelihood that current Tesla owners consider non-Tesla EVs in the future); B) It has the potential to reduce the Supercharger Network usage to the point that demand charges make the sites unprofitable; and C) It has the potential to increase usage of public charging sites to the point that they become profitable (as a result, increasing growth and expansion of competing networks).
It could totally undermind charging on Tesla stations. I mean, if the adapter can handle 250kW then it would totally undermind charging in so many states. Take UT for instance. There are 11 Tesla locations in Utah all under 151kW stations. We have at least 11 CCS superchargers in the state that are 350kW. Not only that last I checked we have 19+ free 125kW superchargers. Many of these 125kW stations are in remote locations like Garden City UT, Castle Dale, Bluff and Salina. I have a friend who has a Cyber Truck deposit and it sounds like he won't go through with the truck if it doesn't come with CCS because of the lack of Tesla infra.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,895 Posts
It could totally undermind charging on Tesla stations. I mean, if the adapter can handle 250kW then it would totally undermind charging in so many states. Take UT for instance. There are 11 Tesla locations in Utah all under 151kW stations. We have at least 11 CCS superchargers in the state that are 350kW. Not only that last I checked we have 19+ free 125kW superchargers. Many of these 125kW stations are in remote locations like Garden City UT, Castle Dale, Bluff and Salina. I have a friend who has a Cyber Truck deposit and it sounds like he won't go through with the truck if it doesn't come with CCS because of the lack of Tesla infra.
Yes, I agree. That was one of the things that Electrify America noted. Utah, in particular, is very expensive for them because of the demand charges and low usage. Many of Electrify America's charging sites are actually better located than the Superchargers, too. For instance, if you need to charge near Saint George, it's a several minute drive off the freeway to get to the Supercharger, but the Electrify America site is just off the freeway in Washington.

Something to consider, though, is that even with an adapter capable of 250 kW in a Tesla (631 A), the Tesla would only see 180 kW to 190 kW. The 350 kW CCS chargers are only 500 A, so because of the Tesla's pack voltage, it wouldn't reach the full 250 kW. Still, 180+ kW is faster than 150 kW, and when the chargers are better disbursed and better located, it would lead to a large population of Tesla owners using Electrify America sites instead of Supercharger sites.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
670 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Eric, sorry to be dense, but does this mean that the "dumb" Tesla adapter would have whatever power is available from the DCFC source or, like the Korean unit, be limited in intake available?

"This new "dumb" adapter that Tesla will be providing in Korea looks just like the European CCS2 adapter they made,..."

Rich

OK, read the above post. The Tesla unit would give something between 150kW and 250kW, correct?
 

·
Registered
2017 Bolt EV LT purchased used, previous vehicle was a 2015 Chevy eSpark
Joined
·
176 Posts
Something to consider, though, is that even with an adapter capable of 250 kW in a Tesla (631 A), the Tesla would only see 180 kW to 190 kW. The 350 kW CCS chargers are only 500 A, so because of the Tesla's pack voltage, it wouldn't reach the full 250 kW. Still, 180+ kW is faster than 150 kW, and when the chargers are better disbursed and better located, it would lead to a large population of Tesla owners using Electrify America sites instead of Supercharger sites.
Great point. I do not know much about the charging curve of a Tesla but does 250kW v. a lower charge rate (between 150kW and 200kW) make much of a difference? Also in Utah charging is .42$ per kWh at every EA station from Washington to Perry UT. Personally on the other point you made I almost would prefer some Tesla Stations on the I-15 because a few of them have pull through slots which is a big deal for me now that I am towing a Tiny house. There are four CCS super stations in the state that I can pull a trailer through in and I know it's going to be annoying at some locations (mainly that Castle Dale one and Moab UT)

Hopefully we will see a Tesla to CCS connector soon. I'd buy one and patronize Tesla's stations just on the basis that some of them look a little easier to pull a trailer into.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,895 Posts
Eric, sorry to be dense, but does this mean that the "dumb" Tesla adapter would have whatever power is available from the DCFC source or, like the Korean unit, be limited in intake available?

"This new "dumb" adapter that Tesla will be providing in Korea looks just like the European CCS2 adapter they made,..."

Rich

OK, read the above post. The Tesla unit would give something between 150kW and 250kW, correct?
The SETEC adapter has a built-in translator to let the car "speak" with the charger. The Tesla adapter appears to be only hardware (i.e., dumb). Basically, all it does is provide the physical connection points for communications, pilot, and DC power. Either the car or (in the case of the S/X) a discrete Powerline Communication module handles the communication with the charger.

As for how much power the Tesla adapter supports, I'm not sure. If it's rated for 350 A, it would support ~125 kW on 150 kW and 350 kW CCS chargers. If it's rated for 500 A, it would support ~125 kW rates on 150 kW CCS chargers and ~180 kW on 350 kW CCS chargers. If it's rated for 631 A, it could potentially support 250 kW charging if/when CCS chargers with >500 A are brought online.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,149 Posts
Hopefully we will see a Tesla to CCS connector soon. I'd buy one and patronize Tesla's stations just on the basis that some of them look a little easier to pull a trailer into.
I would place a "likely never" probability on that. I hope that I am wrong and that Tesla does read the Tesla mission statement sometime, and actual follow through, but I doubt it...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,895 Posts
Great point. I do not know much about the charging curve of a Tesla but does 250kW v. a lower charge rate (between 150kW and 200kW) make much of a difference?
If you're talking about time, it makes a bit of a difference, but not much. It really only matters below 40% battery. You're talking about saving a couple minutes here or there.

Also in Utah charging is .42$ per kWh at every EA station from Washington to Perry UT.
I believe those are non-member rates. Just as with the Bolt EV, a single charging session pays for the $4 per month EA membership, which cuts the cost down to $0.31 per kWh before the membership fee.

Personally on the other point you made I almost would prefer some Tesla Stations on the I-15 because a few of them have pull through slots which is a big deal for me now that I am towing a Tiny house. There are four CCS super stations in the state that I can pull a trailer through in and I know it's going to be annoying at some locations (mainly that Castle Dale one and Moab UT)
Yes, it cuts both ways. The issue isn't a matter of which chargers are better or even which locations are better. The issue is, we shouldn't be forced to use one site when another site would be better for our expectations or needs.

Hopefully we will see a Tesla to CCS connector soon. I'd buy one and patronize Tesla's stations just on the basis that some of them look a little easier to pull a trailer into.
Yes, I've been asking for that for years. Early on, Tesla easily could have charged $1,000 to $1,200 for an adapter like that (plus cost of electricity). Now, the inherent value of one of those chargers has diminished quite a lot. Some people would still want one for any number of reasons (not wanting to support a "compliance" network, wanting a backup, preferring the Supercharger locations, etc.). Still, though, I'd place the current market value of a Tesla-CCS adapter at about $500.
 

·
Registered
2017 Bolt EV LT purchased used, previous vehicle was a 2015 Chevy eSpark
Joined
·
176 Posts
I would place a "likely never" probability on that. I hope that I am wrong and that Tesla does read the Tesla mission statement sometime, and actual follow through, but I doubt it...
Certainly wishful thinking on my part. I'd assume they'd go to CCS before an adapter happens. Honestly I cannot fathom how they plan on rolling out a truck without 800v support. I can't see the current Tesla standard being able to handle 350kW charging like the CCS standard can. Last conference I went to (back in 2019, before the era of the pandemic) I talked with a few industry insiders about medium duty applications for CCS and they said it might be possible for CCS to hit 500kW+ given the physical connector layout. Which, means 1000v architecture if I am not mistaken. Then again, I don't know if their answer was more speculative or based on the research being done on CCS v3+.

EDIT: I am speculating that the cybertruck will run off a conventional pack layout of 72p connections (or 46 for the Model 3); 400ish volts
My math is rough for the battery layout. I am in far too much physical pain to actually go to the effort of finding a wiring diagram and reading it.
 

·
Registered
2017 Bolt EV LT purchased used, previous vehicle was a 2015 Chevy eSpark
Joined
·
176 Posts
Yes, it cuts both ways. The issue isn't a matter of which chargers are better or even which locations are better. The issue is, we shouldn't be forced to use one site when another site would be better for our expectations or needs.
You are indeed correct. This shouldn't be the case. CCS should be the standard for light and medium duty applications. If Tesla opened their network they'd be better off in the long run, both profit wise and in terms of pushing the EV revolution forward. Personally though, I'd love to see an overhaul of the iec62196 standard so it can handle multiphase power before we get too deep into the infrastructure to change it. Especially where solar and microgrids might become more of a thing, and thus having the flexibility to easily phase power for specific purposes (covering that low DC power range a previous thread was discussing). 19.7kW is low seeings as our european counterpart can do 44kW on 3phase if I am not mistaken.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,895 Posts
The risk is there with a DC adapter because it has to pass through whatever charge rate the car is requesting. The car has no control of charging directly. With AC, the car directly controls the rate and taper.
This is not true. The car still sets the limits for the rate of charge, so it does control the charging directly. Even in the case of a DC adapter with a Powerline Communication module, it's not dictating the charge; it's simply translating the car's request to the charger.

I do agree that there are dangers inherent to using an adapter, especially when it comes to build quality and maintenance. Personally, I don't think any adapter should be able to be sold unless it is IEC and UL safety certified (not just "listed"). We are dealing with a lot of power with DC chargers, and if you have some of the quality control issues we've seen with Tesla's J1772 adapter, it won't just burn out the socket/adapter, it might burn down the car and the dispenser as well as any number of things nearby.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,895 Posts
Certainly wishful thinking on my part. I'd assume they'd go to CCS before an adapter happens. Honestly I cannot fathom how they plan on rolling out a truck without 800v support. I can't see the current Tesla standard being able to handle 350kW charging like the CCS standard can. Last conference I went to (back in 2019, before the era of the pandemic) I talked with a few industry insiders about medium duty applications for CCS and they said it might be possible for CCS to hit 500kW+ given the physical connector layout. Which, means 1000v architecture if I am not mistaken. Then again, I don't know if their answer was more speculative or based on the research being done on CCS v3+.

EDIT: I am speculating that the cybertruck will run off a conventional pack layout of 72p connections (or 46 for the Model 3); 400ish volts
My math is rough for the battery layout. I am in far too much physical pain to actually go to the effort of finding a wiring diagram and reading it.
I think part of the reason Tesla went back to redesign the Cybertruck is because they realized that both GM and Rivian were releasing 800 V trucks capable of 300 to 400 kW charging speeds.

In theory, the V3 Supercharger can support up to 315 kW (631 A @ 500 V); however, the current voltage limits for Tesla's packs restrict their V3 speeds to only 250 kW. My guess is, part of the Cybertruck's last minute redesign is likely to involve copying GM's variable voltage Ultium pack so that the Cybertruck can also double the voltage (up from 400 V) when Supercharging. Of course, with that, it's going to require Tesla to start redesigning their Supercharger sites again, and their "V4" Superchargers are likely going to be a return to shared charging stalls, only this time, they'll be sharing two V3 Superchargers. That should give the Cybertruck theoretical charging speeds of 500+ kW.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
727 Posts
That's the one I just referenced, and as I noted, it hasn't gone on sale yet (you are making a preorder). According to the website, they are still in the process of producing the first 1,000 units.
I take the comment on their website "2.The first stage will release 1000pcs" to mean they are making a first run of 1000 pcs regardless of orders. Their website says they will start shipping mid Dec. So that's like, now.
 
1 - 20 of 518 Posts
Top