Ford CEO Says Tesla Superchargers May Become the Standard for EV Charging (reuters.com) 142
Ford CEO Jim Farley said Tesla's Superchargers may become the standard for EV charging in the U.S., a day after the Michigan-based company struck a deal allowing Ford owners to gain access to the rival charging stations in North America. From a report: "I think there's a chance you know," Farley said on Friday in response to a question on CNBC on whether Tesla Superchargers will become the standard for EV charging. Farley told CNBC that General Motors and other automakers are going to "have a big choice to make" in selecting between Tesla's EV chargers and the Combined Charging System (CCS). CCS is one of several competing charging plug standards for DC fast charging. "The CCS standard plays a crucial role in establishing an extensive network of fast charging stations across North America," General Motors said. Since 2012, Tesla has developed and deployed its own high-speed vehicle charger, called Supercharger, which can add up to 322 miles (518 km) of range in just 15 minutes. Farley told CNBC on Friday that Ford had about 10,000 fast chargers and the agreement with Tesla will "double that."
Tesla Superchargers are the reason Tesla does well (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't own a Tesla but I have rented them, and without question they are far and above other charging stations.
They are just more reliably going to be working. At top speed most of the stations are really fast. And the simplicity of them is excellent, which I am assuming Ford is going to be partaking of as well - you just put the charging plug near the port, and it knows who to bill.
I know other charging systems are also making advancements, and I do like competition. But it's important for all car makers to realize just how much of a gap there is, and how vital it is people know there's a charging infrastructure in place they can rely on. It's been a kind of hidden reason behind Tesla's selling so well.
Re:Tesla Superchargers are the reason Tesla does w (Score:5, Insightful)
This is true *right now*, but it's short term thinking. By 2030 there will be 500,000 CCS fast chargers all over the nation (and those are just the ones that Congress approved to be paid for by the feds last year). CCS is going to be everywhere. Tesla can't keep up all by themselves.
Re:Tesla Superchargers are the reason Tesla does w (Score:5, Interesting)
By 2030 there will be 500,000 CCS fast chargers all over the nation
And how many of them will be working?
I question the CCS ability to maintain an ever expanding fleet of chargers since they seem to have trouble maintaining the ones they have.
But even if that all goes as planned, CCS chargers are just not as simple to use.
However, just from a competition standpoint I really, really hope that number is real and they will hit that goal. I want there to be real competition in the EV charging market...
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
And how many of them will be working?
I ask the same about Tesla chargers.
Re: (Score:3)
The nice thing about being a Tesla owner is that you don't have to ask that question. The mean Supercharger uptime percentage last year was 99,95%.
The problem is that far too many other networks don't really give a rat's arse. The difference in their income between 99,95% uptime and 90% uptime is small, and unhappy customers have nowhere else to go if they're "the charging station en route". Even worse, many chargers were built just
Re: (Score:3)
Also, there are multiple Superchargers at virtually every single site. So the worst case is you move to a different stall. The average site today has 10 different stalls. With the old V2 chargers these would be powered by 5 chargers, but with V3 each stall is independent. Sites also generally have multiple transformers feeding them.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure but even if everyone adopts the Tesla Supercharger standard, that doesn't mean Tesla is going to be running all the stations. So overall you'll have the same problems with non-working stations and maintenance.
Re: (Score:3)
Even not having an EV I hav noticed damaged non-Tesla chargers when just driving around.
Maybe we need more camera to catch the coal-rollers red-handed.
Re: (Score:2)
"And how many of them will be working?"
More and more as EV adoption increases, asshole. Will you ever grow out of your lizard-brained ignorance, SuperKendall?
Incidentally, my first Tesla charging experience was a broken charger, happens to Tesla too. The difference is that there are many more Teslas that justify maintenance. Meanwhile, CCS chargers will get vandalized and remain non-operational forever. It's the early adopter phase, something you don't know about SuperKendall. You wait until you sense
Re: (Score:3)
Incidentally, my first Tesla charging experience was a broken charger, happens to Tesla too. The difference is that there are many more Teslas that justify maintenance. Meanwhile, CCS chargers will get vandalized and remain non-operational forever. It's the early adopter phase ...
No, it really isn't. CCS chargers have been around long enough that we shouldn't still be hearing those complaints, yet here we are.
I would argue that this is a demonstration of the difference between a privately owned network and an individual-business-owned network. Tesla builds clusters of chargers and owns them. A lot of the non-Tesla chargers are owned by the businesses that install them, and although they're on a shared network, when they break down, it is still the company's responsibility to pay
Re: (Score:2)
I question the CCS ability to maintain
CCS isn't a company, it's a standard. They will be maintained by a variety of owners serviced by a variety of companies.
But even if that all goes as planned, CCS chargers are just not as simple to use.
Swipe card on RFID reader, plug in cable. If that is too much for you maybe you shouldn't be doing something as complex as driving in the first place. Additionally I wonder how you were ever able to fill up a gasoline car since that is orders of magnitude more complex then using a CCS charger.
Re:Tesla Superchargers are the reason Tesla does w (Score:5, Insightful)
Swipe card on RFID reader, plug in cable.
How is that as simple as Tesla's "Just plug it in" model?
Tesla Steps:
CCS Steps
1 Step is less than 2 Steps
IE Simpler...
Re: (Score:3)
I'll agree that CCS needs the ability to choose to put payment information into the car, and automate payment when you plug it in if you choose to, but honestly, complaining that 'swipe a card and plug it in' is insufficiently simple just makes you look like you're arguing for the sake of arguing.
Re: (Score:3)
complaining that 'swipe a card and plug it in' is insufficiently simple just makes you look like you're arguing for the sake of arguing.
It would if there were only one kind of card to swipe, and if it worked reliably. So far, my experience is that neither of those is true. I have almost always been able to get charging but it's a multi-step process of figuring out which charging network, whether I have that one, whether my information in it is up to date, how much this charger charges (some of them are outrageous) and finally whether the charger works and whether there are some weird restrictions on its use.
My experience with Tesla charge
Re: (Score:2)
And indeed, from the sound of it, "plug it in, it charges" is exactly what Ford is getting from this - it sounds like they'll be getting the exact same user experience as Tesla owners, with their payment mechanism connected to their account, so billing is automatic, and with API access to charger data for the app.
Re: (Score:3)
1 Step is less than 2 Steps IE Simpler...
I think you missed my point. It wasn't that 1 step is less than 2, it's that for this to even be brought up in conversation shows a simply astonishing amount of lazyness which makes me question if the type of person who can't swipe a card should be anywhere near something as complex as an automobile.
God forbid you burn a single calorie by moving an arm.
Re: (Score:3)
CCS chargers are just not as simple to use.
Tesla charger: Pull up, plug in.
EVGo and EA chargers (the ones I use the most): Pull up, plug in, and press 'CONTINUE' on the screen.
Properly designed/maintained CCS chargers are just as simple as Tesla chargers. It's just that Tesla is better at maintaining their chargers.
With that said, I still do like the Tesla plug/charger system, but I don't have any real issue with CCS other than the charging companies needing to catch up on maintenance and reliability.
Re: (Score:2)
Beyond the bad charger design (which also IMHO extends to combining the combination of "charger" and "stall", vs. separating it out like with Tesla - but that's a whole different issue), CCS is just a terrible plug design. It's more expensive on the vehicle end. It handles less power unless you go to high voltages (but those voltages are higher than is convenient for drive unit design, so most vehicles that allow high voltages have to have the battery be able to switch between two different modes, which is
Re: (Score:2)
CCS is a standard, not a company.
Re:Tesla Superchargers are the reason Tesla does w (Score:5, Interesting)
Not even close. If Ford goes for NACS in 2025 it will suck the energy out of CCS in the US. GM might hold out for a while, but NACS is cheaper to implement and has better customer experience than CCS.
The 500k chargers are for systems that support more than one manufacturer. Tesla has a history and system for deploying chargers that is hands-down better than anybody else out there. They can deploy a skid with 4 charging pylons and all the DC electronics integrated in with a single medium voltage conduit required, compared to the mess that other manufacturers are still doing. Others can immitate, but barring a next-level innovation they will struggle.
At least 50% of the EVs on the road in 2030 will be equipped with NACS. My guess is that at least 300k of those chargers will be NACS-only.
Re: (Score:2)
NACS is cheaper to implement because the billing hardware/software is part of the car's computer, rather than being built into the charger. Notice that Tesla chargers have no credit card readers, no RFID readers, and no screens. They developed the chargers to essentially be electricity spigots, while their cars were doing all the leg work of tracking the charging and submitting the information to Tesla's chargers, where their customers are required to have a credit card account on file. In other words,
Re: (Score:2)
"Tesla has a history and system for deploying chargers that is hands-down better than anybody else out there."
They also had a history of making the best BEVs. That is over.
Your opinion. The Model Y is the most popular car in the world now.
"At least 50% of the EVs on the road in 2030 will be equipped with NACS. My guess is that at least 300k of those chargers will be NACS-only."
Considering you are willing to lie about your facts, your guesses are uninteresting. One connector stardard is better than two, as of now CCS is the first standard.
CCS 1 (the version used in the U.S.) is a terrible standard, designed to work around deficiencies in an older charging port standard by grafting on two additional large pins, resulting in an incredibly bulky plug, which causes reliability problems, not to mention being unsightly.
Add to that the fact that Tesla's charging stations can support CCS 1 with a mechanical adapter, and that as soon as they do a minor charge port retrofit (available
How many receptacles? (Score:2)
It's nice having these dotted outside the supercharger footprint, but the range anxiety of coming to a busy or non-working DC Fast Charger is real.
We're going to more pedestals at these places.
Most Su
Re: (Score:2)
This is true *right now*, but it's short term thinking. By 2030 there will be 500,000 CCS fast chargers all over the nation (and those are just the ones that Congress approved to be paid for by the feds last year). CCS is going to be everywhere. Tesla can't keep up all by themselves.
Just noting that the Infrastructure Bill providing this was approved in the House (D:219 / R:2) and Senate (D:48 / R:19 / I:2) -- technically bipartisan, but majority Democrat -- and signed by President Biden in November of his first year in office.
Humorously contrasted to Trump's many/perpetual "Infrastructure Weeks" [politicaldictionary.com] which never actually materialized:
Throughout the Trump administration, the idea of an “infrastructure week” has turned into a bit of a running joke, as the Trump administration has announced one infrastructure week after another. The Week noted that there had been six “infrastructure weeks” in the period between 2017 and 2019, with little visible output from any of the events.
Re: (Score:2)
Based on this news, no, there won't be. Ford is switching to NACS. Tesla is the biggest EV maker in North America, and Ford will be #2 soon if they're not already. Ford isn't just getting adapters - the current generation of Ford vehicles are getting adapters, but after that they're switching natively to NACS. Not CCS.
I don't see how CCS-1 wins after this. That's just too much influence behind NACS now. It's a better connector, with wit
Re: (Score:2)
Is this still true, is the charger patent free? If so, and it is good technology then why re-invent the wheel just to be different.
Seems like Ford is making the right move?
Tesla Opens up Its EV Charging Connector to the World
https://www.notateslaapp.com/n... [notateslaapp.com]
Re: (Score:2)
"But it's important for all car makers to realize just how much of a gap there is, and how vital it is people know there's a charging infrastructure in place they can rely on."
But "a gap" is not ensured forever and adopting Tesla's connector standard is not the only way, or best way, to serve users.
No one would argue that Tesla's charging network is the best today, esp. in the US, but so what? EV is very early and it will last a long time. Ford adopting Tesla's connector just increases the likelihood that
Re: (Score:2)
I don't own a Tesla but I have rented them, and without question they are far and above other charging stations.
The fastest charging stations on the market are CCS. Tesla is playing catchup. Their supercharging network in Europe is abysmal but the car still sells well showing that no one gives a shit about superchargers.
Literally nothing in your title is a reflection of reality.
Re: Tesla Superchargers are the reason Tesla does (Score:2)
Literally nothing you claim is true
Re: (Score:2)
"Just putting the charging plug near the port" should be scary to a lot of people. Tie the payment to the person driving, not the automobile itself. And allow smart card, chip-and-PIN, s and other forms of payment for those of us dubious about NFC.
Question (Score:3)
can add up to 322 miles (518 km) of range in just 15 minutes.
How much does this type of charging shorten the life of the batteries? Last I heard, jamming a bunch of charge into a battery too quickly has undesirable effects.
Re: (Score:2)
Unless you are using a supercharger every day, not much. Superchargers are meant to be for use for longer trips, where you need fast-charge capacity to keep moving.
The "standard" charging should be done using 120VAC or 240VAC through the "wall connector" or "mobile connector" with adapters if maximizing the battery lifetime is important to you (and it really should be). Yes, this is a problem for apartment dwellers that may not have access to overnight level-2 charging, and that's something that needs sol
Re: (Score:2)
"The "standard" charging should be done using 120VAC or 240VAC"
120VAC 13amp is painfully slow charging for a typical EV
Re: (Score:2)
Which is why the chargers support multiple voltage and amperage ratings? Feel free to plug into a NEMA 14-50 if you like.
120VAC @ 15A sucks. But you know what sucks worse? No charging at all. Having a sucky option is always better than no option at all.
Re:Question (Score:5, Informative)
It depends on the voltage of the car. Teslas are 400V, where as other cars are 800V. The higher voltage means less stress on each cell for a given power level.
It would be a shame if Tesla chargers became standard. For a start there is already CCS and it would be better if we could settle on just one standard. Tesla chargers are less efficient too, because they keep the AC-DC converter far from the car so there are bigger cable losses. They are all 400V and Tesla doesn't seem to have any plans for 800V support either.
Oh, and you need an app to use them. No built in payment terminal.
Re:Question (Score:5, Informative)
> Teslas are 400V, where as other cars are 800V. The higher voltage means less stress on each cell for a given power level.
You don't seem to be aware that the voltage applied to each cell for charging has nothing to do with the voltage across the charging cable.
800V allows the charging cable to be skinnier, at the cost of higher isolation and component cost in the car's electronics. That's why you see it in expensive cars like the Porche EV.
The stress is a function of charging rate, so 800V is a way to deliver more power for the same conductor width (P=I^2R and all that) but with higher charging rates comes higher stress. So 800V charging enables the possibility of higher stress charging, while in practice, the chargers tend to not have the capability to deliver that extra power. So it's moot.
The stress vs charge rate curve is not particularly steep either. So the potential difference in stress is not much, while the actual difference is zero.
Re: (Score:3)
"That's why you see it in expensive cars like the Porche EV"
The Ioniq 5 has 400/800 volt charging capability & is price competitive with a Model Y & has V2L power export which isn't a feature of any Tesla
Re: (Score:2)
The switching technology for 800V is different than 400V too, and very slightly less efficient. Less copper though. It is more a tactical issue than strategic.
The charging voltage to a cell is what it is, how the cells are wired is irrelevant. Not only is the "actual difference" zero, it cannot be anything other than zero.
Re: (Score:2)
> Teslas are 400V, where as other cars are 800V. The higher voltage means less stress on each cell for a given power level.
You don't seem to be aware that the voltage applied to each cell for charging has nothing to do with the voltage across the charging cable. 800V allows the charging cable to be skinnier, at the cost of higher isolation and component cost in the car's electronics. That's why you see it in expensive cars like the Porche EV.
I can't imagine anybody doing DC-DC conversion on the car side to compensate for a higher voltage on the charge circuit. (Or do you just mean thicker insulation?)
AFAIK, the charge voltage is typically defined by the battery configuration. Each cell has to charge at a specific voltage, and if you have, for example, 100 cells in series, the charge voltage across the pack would then be ~100x the charge voltage of each individual cell.
The reason that more powerful cars have higher charging voltage is because
Re: (Score:2)
>AFAIK, the charge voltage is typically defined by the battery configuration. Each cell has to charge at a specific voltage, and if you have, for example, 100 cells in series, the charge voltage across the pack would then be ~100x the charge voltage of each individual cell.
I don't design EV battery systems, but I've done my share of LiIon and LiPoly chargers in my career.
To apply something like 800V to the terminals of a pack means you are going to have more cells in series. Lets say 2X the number compar
Tesla's skipping 800v for 1000v (Score:2)
Tesla Semi is the first of several vehicles to feature a thousand-volt powertrain [teslarati.com]
Re: (Score:2)
"It depends on the voltage of the car. Teslas are 400V, where as other cars are 800V. The higher voltage means less stress on each cell for a given power level."
Yikes. Relatively few cars currently are 800V, and system voltage has utterly nothing to do with cell stress.
"For a start there is already CCS and it would be better if we could settle on just one standard."
Yes.
"...and Tesla doesn't seem to have any plans for 800V support either."
Yes, they do. The problem is that Elon Musk is a pathological liar so
Re: (Score:2)
P=VI
I=P/V
The higher V is, the lower I is for a given changing power. I has a big impact on battery wear.
Re: (Score:2)
The higher V is, the lower I is for a given changing power. I has a big impact on battery wear.
Since current is constant throughout a series circuit, if you had the same number of batteries of cells in parallel for a 400V pack as an 800V pack, you would still be doubling the current going through each battery in the pack and not halving it. Audi says they are using 33 modules of 12 cells each, which is weird. It takes half of their cells in series to get nominal 800V, but you can't divide 33 that way. Maybe each module is divided in half?
Re: (Score:2)
Early Nissan Leafs owners were told to limit their fast charging usage, but what Nissan learned over time was that fast charging is actually good for their batteries.
I can't speak to other companies, and I almost never fast charge my Mach E (only have fast charged it 4 times since picking it up from the dealer last August). Fast charging time is really not a big issue for most people if you have any access to a regular charger at home or work.
Re: (Score:2)
Early Nissan Leafs owners were told to limit their fast charging usage, but what Nissan learned over time was that fast charging is actually good for their batteries.
I have a 2015 Nissan Leaf. It's hard to over use the fast charging, because finding ChaDeMo chargers is like finding hens teeth.
The car claims to still have all its 'bars' but the range is clearly down a bit from when I got the car used a few years ago. It spends most of its life plugged in and at 100% charge (whatever 100% means in a Leaf).
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I'm really surprised Nissan had held out on ChaDeMo for as long as they have, way too long.
Re: Question (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately the above has so many puppet accounts (and trolls on all of them) that we're out of prizes at this point.
Re: Question (Score:2)
Are you also proud when shooting fish in a barrel?
I don't understand why Ford is doing this (Score:4, Insightful)
CCS is not ideal, but marrying yourself to Tesla now is a very bad idea. The whole industry was moving toward CCS, and even Tesla was starting to implement CCS into their Superchargers. Unless Tesla opens up their standard this is a BAD idea. It will lock Ford into Tesla for years and make it very difficult for them to wiggle out. Meanwhile the rest of the industry is building out a CCS nationwide network. It's a bit behind Tesla *right now* but it won't be for long.
That said, I drive a Mustang Mach E and would probably consider buying a Tesla Supercharger adapter. Which is all Ford *should* be doing. Providing supercharger adapters, NOT walking away from CCS!
Re:I don't understand why Ford is doing this (Score:5, Informative)
Tesla DID open up their standard. [tesla.com]. And there's nothing preventing you from still using CCS where available. Even Tesla is now selling a CCS adapter in North America [tesla.com].
Re:I don't understand why Ford is doing this (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not sure, could be, but Tesla has been tricky in the past.
At one point, they announced that it was 'open', but the terms of the free licensing was that you 'reciprocated' by forfeiting any rights to go after any patent, trademark, or copyright claims against Tesla, no matter the technology, if you used their specification. In exchange, you could use a very specific chunk of Tesla designs, *but* Tesla reserving the right to accuse your design of infringement anyway, based on vague statement of if your use of their specs resulted in 'brand confusion'. Basically a number of industry folks hand to come out and explain how it was just impossible to touch.
Now this is the second round, which purports to be 'really open, honest we mean it this time'. Per your link I could find all sorts of information, but at no point did they specify the license or use the magic words 'place into the public domain'.
Thus far they have said 'open' and they renamed it to the 'north american charging standard', but at least the public information is not showing actionable details about rights to actually implement the described information. Saying 'open' is insufficient, as that can mean a whole lot, or nothing at all.
So I'll reserve judgement knowing that Tesla has previously proclaimed loudly and publicly about how everyone can just use Tesla designs, and on the other hand been actually infeasible in the details of the licensing terms. This go around they may have actually gotten serious about it to get some of that federal money if they can get industry adoption, and a business case for selling the electricity to other cars, but I can't see enough to be sure and I'm not going to trust the high level promise without details to clarify all the potential gotchas.
Re:I don't understand why Ford is doing this (Score:4, Insightful)
If Tesla is serious they should submit it to ISO/IEC/IEEE to get it built into a standard and that would probably be enough for any manufacturers and charging operators to hop on board.
If it's the case Ford had to "cut a deal" with Tesla to share the network it kinda cuts against the concept of it being a truly open standard like CCS
Re:I don't understand why Ford is doing this (Score:5, Informative)
They did open up the standard and submit it. That's different from allowing another company (Ford) to use chargers they own and control.
A standard is not the same as actual physical installed chargers.
Re: (Score:2)
Submit it where? As far as I can find there is no IEC standard for the NACS plug. Is there a non-binding open licnese stating i can grab the designs and implement them with no risk of revocation like CCS? Any involvement in the future design and implemenation like one gets from CCS/IEC?
I get the difference between a plug and charger network but that is also still the fact we are back to a world (not even a world, this is just an America thing, Teslas in EU come with CCS so there is literally no downside he
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, what bastards for not being clairvoyant so they could design their chargers to work with future cars from other manufacturers that independently decided to put their charging port somewhere else.
Seriously, do you bitch and moan that your 10 year old laptop doesn't accept brand-new Thunderbolt 4 devices?
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla released their connector for implementation by others, that doesn't mean that others can use Tesla's network. There are no examples of that yet.
Tesla also said they would open their network to CCS, but it is unlikely there are any Tesla chargers open yet to CCS. Also, Tesla's big problem is that their CEO is a pathological liar.
"And there's nothing preventing you from still using CCS where available."
Don't know who the "you" is here. If your car is CCS, then of course. If it is Tesla, why comment
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla released their connector for implementation by others, that doesn't mean that others can use Tesla's network. There are no examples of that yet.
Except for in Europe. Or where they've been testing in the US. So basically you don't know what you're talking about.
Tesla also said they would open their network to CCS, but it is unlikely there are any Tesla chargers open yet to CCS. Also, Tesla's big problem is that their CEO is a pathological liar.
Just because Elon Musk has gone full dipshit doesn't mean that they don't have hundreds of engineers still working on things. As previously stated, there have been reports of them testing cross-compatibility with non-Tesla cars.
"And there's nothing preventing you from still using CCS where available."
Don't know who the "you" is here. If your car is CCS, then of course. If it is Tesla, why comment on this topic? If if is a future Ford, how do you know?
Because there are CCS adapters for Tesla, and Tesla cars sold in Europe are mandated to have CCS ports, which means Tesla will be mandated to continue designing for
Re: (Score:2)
Also, the reason why Ford is doing this: they don't want to build and operate another charging network. That's why they partnered with Electrify America with the Mach E launch. Unfortunately, Electrify America is a for-profit charging network that isn't the best at maintaining their charging network, and there's zero integration with the car itself so the UX is expensive garbage.
With Tesla opening their charging standard and network because they want federal subsidy to expand it (yay, Congress managed to
Re: (Score:2)
It would be best to have just one standard. But barring that, I just want either for Tesla chargers to support CCS, or to be outnumbered by CCS chargers, so the issue becomes mostly moot. I know a handful of Tesla chargers support CCS now, but they seem to be trickling that out pretty slowly.
Re: (Score:2)
It's kind of like having a good standard that everyone agrees with, or a fake Open Documents style of standard which is just a market dominator exterting their influence.
Re: (Score:3)
Purely from a merit standpoint, 5-10 years from now Tesla will be irrelevant if not insolvent. Every other car manufacturer can do a better job. What is important to charging standards is to NOT allow Tesla to grant itself perpetual relevance.
People want to make a deal out of the smaller size of NACS, that doesn't matter and users don't care. Reliability and ease of use are what matters. CCS needs to be built out, improve reliability and stop being a hodgepodge of crazy billing. Tesla really offers lit
Re: (Score:3)
"Unfortunately, Electrify America is a for-profit charging network ... and there's zero integration with the car itself so the UX is expensive garbage."
Yes, that's why gasoline cars never succeeded.
"With Tesla opening their charging standard and network because they want federal subsidy to expand it..."
Elon Musk is a liar, Tesla will have "opened" their standard and network ONLY when we see it.
"Ford wins because they get a first-class charging experience for their customers. Ford buyers win because they get
Re: (Score:3)
"Linux is good and all... but after meeting with Microsoft Officials(tm) I can proclaim that Windows is the Standard for the Future!"
Re: (Score:3)
More like "USB is good, but after meeting with Apple, the lightning connector is the FUTURE!"
Re: (Score:2)
Well, USB is not a great standard, but it's very popular. Lightning is more of an accumulation of existing signals into a single cable (USB, HDMI, etc). More competing with USB would be Thunderbolt or SCSI which debateably can be said to be better technically (to be fair, USB's original goal was to have low cost, low speed devices with no smarts). When the marketing is stripped away, is the Tesla supercharger really a technically better approach?
Re: (Score:2)
Ultimately, yeah, the comparison fits and Tesla's solution was probably better. They designed fast charging into their cable from the beginning, where as CCS had their fast charging bolted onto their Level II plug (which is why the plug is so large). If Tesla had opened their standard 10 years ago then they would probably be the clear winner today. But they didn't, they wanted to try to lock their drivers into their equipment. And then the Federal Government said "We aren't investing in a single company lik
Re: (Score:2)
Teslas, even model 3s, come with a plug in adapter for the slower charging "J" plug that's standard ("level 2" charging stations). So even for slow chargers on their latest models they didn't stick with what everyone was standardizing on. I know they want their customers to use the fast chargers, but the fast chargers are rare compared to level 2 chargers that are at many locations, including places of work where they can be free for employee use.
Re: (Score:2)
and even Tesla was starting to implement CCS into their Superchargers
They still will. The EU is forcing this issue.
Unless Tesla opens up their standard this is a BAD idea.
Tesla did open up their standard. It was a good move of them but ultimately CCS was already very wide spread outside of the USA when Tesla was pushing their superchargers. Good thing is the superiority of the Tesla superchargers drove CCS to fast track version 2.0 of the standard and massively increase their fast charger capabilities.
Which is all Ford *should* be doing. Providing supercharger adapters, NOT walking away from CCS!
I doubt Ford will truly move away from CCS. They pretty much have to support it in Europe since CCS was standardised by the Altern
Re: (Score:2)
As someone who has owned cars that used both the adapters, CCS and Tesla, I can totally understand the reasons behind Ford's decision. CCS adapter was designed by a committee and it shows. Compared to the Tesla charger, it is ugly, bulky, massive and more difficult to use. Also the Tesla adapter can communicate in both directions. For example, when I press a button on the Tesla adapter, it opens the charge door on the vehicle. There is no such thing on the CCS adapter.
When I look at both adapters side-
right to repair needs to ban the lockout for non d (Score:2)
right to repair needs to ban the lockout for non dealer repairs being locked out of fully useing the charging systems and needs to ban
licensing fees like forcing car manufacturers to pay fees to Tesla
forcing cars to be registered with Tesla
forcing each car model to approved to use it
banning cars for being to old
must take cash and CC's at the station
must have free wifi if forced to use an app to pay on card
no non tesla usage fee
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nor should it have, just like having a JD doesn't mean you can act as a lawyer, or having an MD doesn't mean you can as a medical doctor.
Choice (Score:2)
>"automakers are going to "have a big choice to make" in selecting between Tesla's EV chargers and the Combined Charging System (CCS)."
Well, actually, no.
1) They could offer one connector and an adapter for the other
2) They could offer both connectors
Not saying it is ideal, economical, or practical. But it should be possible.
Besides:
https://electrek.co/2022/05/10... [electrek.co]
Plus, Tesla already offers its own CCS adapter, at least for 250kW:
https://shop.tesla.com/product... [tesla.com]
And some companies are working on the re
Re: (Score:2)
>"automakers are going to "have a big choice to make" in selecting between Tesla's EV chargers and the Combined Charging System (CCS)."
Well, actually, no.
1) They could offer one connector and an adapter for the other 2) They could offer both connectors
This is, of course, trivial, because they both use the CCS protocol for communication. Tesla uses CCS protocol when talking to newer cars, and CHAdeMO for talking to older cars that don't have the new CCS-compliant charge port controller board yet.
Incidentally, this also means that with a mechanical adapter, the Tesla charging stations could probably become a universal charging solution, including for older cars with CHAdeMO, at least in theory. All of the authentication when charging via CCS happens thro
We're talking about a plug here (Score:2)
Superchargers are DC fast chargers which CCS supports.
Tesla is in the same boat Apple is in with Lightning port; yes it has advantages and was on the scene before USB-C but if you are going to keep it locked behind licensing the rest of the industry is going to move towards an open standard and now Apple after holding out for so long is being forced to support it, just like Tesla will be eventually.
Tesla has no interest in being "the standard" they want vendor lock-in otherwise they have been free to releas
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yup, Thunderbolt has been on USB-C for awhile now, since V3 i believe due to it being an Intel thing and whatever you say about Intel they do understand the importance of open standards.
Before that even Thunderbolt originally was on mini-Displayport which on the other side of this story was an Apple developed connector but they released it on free licensing which functionally turned it into a de-facto standard and you still see lot's of places now.
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla is in the same boat Apple is in with Lightning port; yes it has advantages and was on the scene before USB-C but if you are going to keep it locked behind licensing the rest of the industry is going to move towards an open standard and now Apple after holding out for so long is being forced to support it, just like Tesla will be eventually.
Tesla literally offered to license the technology and open up their supercharger network to other car companies way back in 2015 [chargedevs.com].
This is not at all the same thing as Lightning, where the company wanted to keep the connector proprietary. NACS has always been available to other automakers. None of them were interested. Whether the terms were too onerous or they just couldn't stomach the thought of partnering with Tesla, I couldn't say.
Either way, IMO, it would be more accurate to say that Ford came crawlin
Re: (Score:2)
It's a bit disengenous to point to other manufacturers as if they are the problems for turning down Tesla's generous offer to license their proprietary tech.
The fact that there are "terms" at all is why that promise (which the article points to nothing but a statement from Musk) is kinda empty and really does nothing to invalidate my point; if in 2015 they were serious about making their plug a standard they could have easily published the design, royalty and patent free for everyone.
If I want to build an E
Re: (Score:2)
It's a bit disengenous to point to other manufacturers as if they are the problems for turning down Tesla's generous offer to license their proprietary tech.
Not just terms for the plug. Terms for using Tesla's charging network. That can't happen (properly) without some sort of terms, realistically speaking, because it involves integration between Tesla's servers and the navigation system in the cars, plus billing integration, and probably other things that I'm not thinking of at the moment.
Other car companies rejected that offer for eight years. Then, just three months ago, Tesla started upgrading superchargers with CCS adapters, and made it so that consumer
I suspect Tesla's going to get bought out (Score:3, Interesting)
It'll eventually come back down to earth and when it does they'll be a buy out. If it happens before a complete drop off I think it'll be Ford, but otherwise I'm thinking Chrysler.
Re: (Score:3)
It'll eventually come back down to earth and when it does they'll be a buy out. If it happens before a complete drop off I think it'll be Ford, but otherwise I'm thinking Chrysler.
You misspelled Fiat there. Chrysler is not a thing any more, it's just part of Stellantis, formed from FCA and Peugeot. And the only way they're getting Tesla is if its value drops off to nothing, because as a merger of a whole bunch of brands which were about to fail, they are not exactly flush with cash.
Re: (Score:2)
As for their cash situation that's kind of why I brought them up. If Tesla waits too long to sell it'll go to zero and Chrysler-Fiat will be the only ones willing and foolish enough to buy them out.
I don't think the Super Charger is going to save Tesla, because they had to give that up to get the EV subsidies Biden promised them.
Re:I suspect Tesla's going to get bought out (Score:5, Insightful)
As for their cash situation that's kind of why I brought them up. If Tesla waits too long to sell it'll go to zero and Chrysler-Fiat will be the only ones willing and foolish enough to buy them out.
Here's the thing, Tesla has negative net debt. I don't think you can say that about any other major automaker. They are financially on more solid footing than Ford, GM, Toyota, BMW, etc.
Tesla also doesn't have to share profits with a huge dealer network that is built around making a big chunk of their revenue from service (which happens at a lower rate for EVs), so they don't have that huge problem looming just over the horizon.
And Tesla's cars are becoming more popular every year. The Model Y just unseated the Toyota Corolla as the #1 best-selling car in the world.
So if you're waiting for Tesla to collapse, I think you're going to be waiting a long time.
Re: (Score:2)
Its value will drop to nothing, though. The question is time frame. Tesla is not a car company.
Tesla makes crappy cars with good electric drivetrains and operates a charging network that could remain relevant for a while. I agree that they may ultimately get bought out by a real car company as there could be some value it. They could then sell off the charging network. Fact is, though, that BEV is far easier to develop than ICE and everyone is realizing it. Tesla's few technical advantages today will so
Re: (Score:2)
LiDAR (Score:2)
I don't think Tesla ever used LiDAR.
They removed radar and more recently ultrasonic sensors in favour of cameras(https://www.tesla.com/en_gb/support/transitioning-tesla-vision) perhaps that is what you were thinking of.
I think the RAV4 uses radar for cruise control, I certainly can't find anything about it having LiDAR.
Either way they massively cut corners (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Their massively overvalued right now (I haven't run the numbers, but I know at one point they were worth more than all the other car companies combined). That valuation was based largely on their promises of full self driving cars in the next 5 years, which I think we all know turned out to be bupkis. They're starting to face some real competition, and it's going to be difficult for them to hang with the likes of BMW & Mercedes in the luxury EV market. Their CEO constantly saying and doing dumb things doesn't help either. They've dropped 50 spots on most reputable brands [benzinga.com] rankings since that mess really got going....
I'm surprised that Musk's escapades haven't made a bigger dent in Tesla's stock price.
Musk's self-driving flakiness always bothered me. But his previous public persona of 'eccentric engineer' never really alienated anyone. If I'd been in a position to buy a new car I probably would have gotten a Tesla.
Now? He's developing a Trumpian addiction to publicity and is promoting far-right political figures, he's making the Tesla brand downright toxic.
I'd be willing to pay a decent premium in cost and/or inferior f
It may be just as well you didn't (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Tesla are currently capitalized at $612B.
It'll eventually come back down to earth and when it does they'll be a buy out. If it happens before a complete drop off I think it'll be Ford, but otherwise I'm thinking Chrysler.
Ford are worth $48B. Chrysler were bought out by Fiat (Stellantis) who are worth $49B. If Tesla lost 90% of its value, it would still be worth more than either company.
https://companiesmarketcap.com... [companiesmarketcap.com]
Less of an issue (Score:2)
This is less of an issue than you might think. Both CCS & NACS (tesla) plugs speak the same language now (CCS won). It's just a matter of the physical plug now and I wouldn't see why chargers couldn't have both in the future.
Re: (Score:3)
I use both (CCS & NACS) - Tesla's plug is just way easier to handle and plug in. CCS is very bulky in comparison. I hope NACS wins out, b/c it'll be easier for us all.
I Wish Them Luck! (Score:2)
Disclaimer: I don't own a Tesla.
The NACS (what Tesla called it after opening it up) is objectively the better plug. I hope it wins out. It's not like Europe and North America are using the same plug anyway (CCS 1 vs 2), while China and Japan have two yet different plugs. So we might as well choose the better plug while there's still a chance.
eBike Charger are Needed (Score:2)
Tesla Rapid Chargers Being Implented in India (Score:2)
India is implementing Tesla rapid chargers. [imgur.com] And apparently their electrical distribution system doesn't really have ongoing daily blackouts. Good luck saving the world with EVs.
It's NOT about efficiency of storage no matter what Musk tells you. It's about being able to DISTRIBUTE the energy. Not going to happen for EVs in the third world where 70% of humans live. EV fanbois are working hard to put all our eggs in a single basket that has a hole in the bottom.
Good move! (Score:2)