GM adopts Tesla's NACS standard! Munro begs Rivian to switch

[evhelphub]

The use of an adapter seems like a no brainer option for Rivian.

The fact that the adapter isn’t available makes it seem like Tesla isn’t comfortable with that.

Based on what Ford and GM have announced, I think Tesla is only allowing an adapter, if oems also promise to integrate the Tesla plug at some point.

If so, the question is why does Tesla care about the plug integration?

You could be right. Interesting indeed that no one is going adapter-only so far. Is it because Tesla is tying their hands or is it because these companies think it really is the better route long term?

I do think it is feasible that these companies see CCS as a lesser technology and don't want to seem like the company that's getting left behind, they are followers after all. Hard to tell with a sample size of two, but If one more OEM goes all-in I'll be convinced of your point.

We should know here pretty soon. EOM is my guess.

Sponsored

 

[scottf200]

You could be right. Interesting indeed that no one is going adapter-only so far. Is it because Tesla is tying their hands or is it because these companies think it really is the better route long term?

I do think it is feasible that these companies see CCS as a lesser technology and don't want to seem like the company that's getting left behind, they are followers after all. Hard to tell with a sample size of two, but If one more OEM goes all-in I'll be convinced of your point.

We should know here pretty soon. EOM is my guess.

But Tesla clearly doesn't want to JUST sell adapters - they want to ALSO lock people into their proprietary network. Making deals with other manufacturers not only gets them the adapter revenue, but also gets them the recurring, long-term licensing revenue. Mo' money for Tesla. They really don't need an agreement with either Ford or GM to sell adapters, but they are going to leverage their proprietary technology to sell Ford-specific and GM-specific adapters as a way to try to milk as much out of this as they can.

Why deals? I think the deal needs to be the NACS needs to be on the front right or rear left.

The vast majority of Tesla Supercharge sites are being planned with the prefabricated 4:1 'pre-assembled supercharger units' which means the vehicles left-rear or front-right is key so vehicles like Rivian (etc) don't take up 2 stalls.

Tesla's presentations by the execs in that area state this allows them to install them faster in weeks instead of months and at *much* cost savings (investor day pres). That, of course, lets them install even more for the same overall expense budget.

https://insideevs.com/news/657795/tesla-shows-how-prefabricated-supercharger-units-save-time-costs/

 

[Sully151]

There is an Outlet Mall about halfway between Los Angeles and San Diego. On one side there are 3 EA chargers. On the other side there are like 20 Tesla Super Chargers.

I have been to the EA in my Mini 5 or 6 times.

I have had to wait once for the EA charger to open up. That was because there were two Teslas using them because all of the Tesla Chargers were full. Imagine what the Tesla Super Charger station will look when every Ford and GM can all charge there.

I was in Yosemite over the weekend. There is a Super Charger station at the lodge we stayed at. It was basically empty.

There are Rivian Destination Chargers in the Valley. They were always full. A couple of Rivians, a few Teslas, and a few others.

Seems to me the best thing Rivian can do is get the ok to use Tesla with an adapter and give us the option to use whatever charger is available.

 

[Brewbud]

If I was a Tesla owner I would be bummed. Up until now, they have been able to use pretty much any charge station, aside from RAN, by using an adapter. Now there will be people tying up their previous Tesla only spots. It gets worse than that too. Because of Tesla's short cords, there will be more blocking of Tesla stalls. Tesla cords are on the rear driver's corner. Any car that has a driver's side plug in the front, will have to use the charger from the stall to the left. This effectively blocks two stalls where a Tesla can charge. Hopefully there will be longer cables installed.

 

[scottf200]

If I was a Tesla owner I would be bummed. Up until now, they have been able to use pretty much any charge station, aside from RAN, by using an adapter. Now there will be people tying up their previous Tesla only spots. It gets worse than that too. Because of Tesla's short cords, there will be more blocking of Tesla stalls. Tesla cords are on the rear driver's corner. Any car that has a driver's side plug in the front, will have to use the charger from the stall to the left. This effectively blocks two stalls where a Tesla can charge. Hopefully there will be longer cables installed.

Reason for the "deals" with Ford and GM. Right (pass.) front or left (driver) rear.
https://www.rivianforums.com/forum/...eslas-nacs-standard.15890/page-10#post-344749

 

[DTown3011]

If I was a Tesla owner I would be bummed. Up until now, they have been able to use pretty much any charge station, aside from RAN, by using an adapter. Now there will be people tying up their previous Tesla only spots. It gets worse than that too. Because of Tesla's short cords, there will be more blocking of Tesla stalls. Tesla cords are on the rear driver's corner. Any car that has a driver's side plug in the front, will have to use the charger from the stall to the left. This effectively blocks two stalls where a Tesla can charge. Hopefully there will be longer cables installed.

I think Tesla owners certainly lose initially in this agreement, given they've had the best network (Tesla) all to themselves for years but once it opens up it's going to be significantly harder to charge with more traffic. That said, perhaps the added revenue of this allows Tesla to expand to more places since they have demonstrated they are the only company capable of creating a large and reliable charging network. I for one can't wait to see how this all plays out.

 

[SASSquatch]

Eh. While I'm not a Tesla owner yet I'm delighted on this news. Now Tesla and everyone else will be building Superchargers.
I suspect they'll do an announcement on Twitter spaces again soon too.

Yeah, I wouldn't hold your breath on other OEMs building Super Chargers. I can almost guarantee you that won't happen. What may happen is that Tesla is extracting money from the OEMS (Pay to Play) to open their network up to their respective customers.

The question is, will Tesla accelerate building out their Super Charger network, or will they simply use this as a cash grab. Remember, they are also charging non-Tesla owners a lot higher rate to use the Tesla charger.

 

[VSG]

I think the deal needs to be the NACS needs to be on the front right or rear left.

But the vehicle charger port location is not part of the Tesla "standard", right? Tesla chargers are reliable in part because of their closed ecosystems - all the vehicles charging have the same charge port location, and have the same hardware and software on both ends of the charging. That makes it SIMPLE to achieve reliability. (Or at least a lot simpler.)

What makes a standard is the things that AREN'T specified, as much as the things that ARE. If Tesla has to deal with EVs that may have a charge port at any of the four corners, then they will have some of the same problems that EA and other networks have - we've already seen that with the Magic Docks. Having to make longer cables means having to implement active cooling in the cables which means more problems. Having to support more vehicle orientations means not all Tesla chargers will be available at any time (just like EA chargers), and having to deal with a variety of "NACS" implementations will mean a variety of incompatibilities. Are you suggesting that Tesla should dictate where the charging port is? We don't even have that with ICE vehicles. That would be a cop-out on Tesla's part, because it would be an admission that they can't build a reliable network that operates under the same conditions as everyone else.

The problems I've had with EA chargers are because of the mix of 150kW and 350kW cables, the lack of power sharing for the two cables at each station, the location of the Rivian charging port which means that only a fraction of the parking spots can be used for charging (especially when others are present), and because, occasionally, a charger isn't working and that is not evident from a distance so I have to pull in, try to charge, then pull out and move to a different spot to charge. With Tesla, all the parking spots are identical, all the vehicles have their charging ports in the exact same location, all the charger cables are short and don't need to be cooled or stretched or bent to reach the charging port. I've also had problems with the app not being able to initiate a charge, and having to call in to get them to manually initiate the charge. Will Tesla have 24/7 customer service like EA to do this? All of these things will affect Tesla when they open up their network.

 

[scottf200]

I think Tesla owners certainly lose initially in this agreement, given they've had the best network (Tesla) all to themselves for years but once it opens up it's going to be significantly harder to charge with more traffic. That said, perhaps the added revenue of this allows Tesla to expand to more places since they have demonstrated they are the only company capable of creating a large and reliable charging network. I for one can't wait to see how this all plays out.

100% expect the growth of Superchargers to expand even faster with additional income. Tesla certain could not risk pissing off their existing customer base with this problem.

Supercharge.Info

 

[Autolycus]

Just want to throw out something about the use of the word "standard" here, particularly when paired with the word "open". An open standard requires that an independent entity have control over certifications that allow interoperability. If Tesla actually wants to create an open standard, they have to separate themselves from any control over future changes to the standard as well as relinquishing control over who can make things that use the standard. That would mean any manufacturer who can meet the specs of the standard has to be allowed to use a supercharger or any other charger that also uses the standard. And Tesla can't have any say in that. Otherwise a) it's not a standard and b) Tesla would be acting anti-competitively.

My biggest concern with this news, as it was with the Ford news, is twofold: 1) This will fracture the market, resulting in a worse consumer experience. Nobody likes adapters. They're terrible from a UX perspective. They introduce additional failure points. They're something that can be lost or stolen.

2) This will chill investment by non-Tesla charging networks because of the uncertainty.
3) It puts us closer to a true nightmare scenario from a competition standpoint where Tesla, an auto manufacturer, has market dominance over a critical component of all of their competition. This would be like Ford owning 50% of all gas stations in the US and having the ability to block GM cars from using any of them.

 

[izgoy]

Let me see if I get this right.

Ford and GM are adopting the Tesla (NACS) plug.

If a Mach E goes to a Tesla charger, they are billed through Ford, plus an additional fee from Tesla. So a Mach E using a Tesla SC will be paying more than the Model Y charging next to them?

Or, they can go to a CCS charger and simply pay EA fees.

Next, let’s say Rivian agrees to also support NACS, we will have to have an adapter to use a SC, but we can also use a CCS charger without the adapter. This would give Rivian the ability to use whatever charger is available, or less expensive.

You are pretty much wrong on everything you stated here.

 

[izgoy]

That would mean any manufacturer who can meet the specs of the standard has to be allowed to use a supercharger or any other charger that also uses the standard. And Tesla can't have any say in that. Otherwise a) it's not a standard and b) Tesla would be acting anti-competitively.

So, are you saying that Rivian blocking other EV brands from its DC chargers means that CCS1 is not a standard and also that Rivian is acting anti-competitively?

 

[scottf200]

But the vehicle charger port location is not part of the Tesla "standard", right?

What I said had nothing to do with standard.

I was saying I think it is the reason for the "deal" with Ford and GM vs just selling an $200 adapter to everyone and let it be a free-for-all at the chargers.
https://www.rivianforums.com/forum/...eslas-nacs-standard.15890/page-10#post-344749

Prefab supercharges that go up in weeks vs months are made for left-rear or right-front access.
v4 supercharger cables are just a little longer. They can't have them dragging on the ground and be run over or added resistance heat/losses. Redesigning pedestals to be higher and cord isn't happening (ie. longer cord not wanted). Longer gas station hoses are not the same problems.

 

[2025R1S]

I suspect the reason both Ford and GM have to wait until 2024 for adapters is because there is more to it than just making an adapter. The engineering teams have to be working on confirming the specifics and making changes where necessary.

 

[DuoRivians]

So, are you saying that Rivian blocking other EV brands from its DC chargers means that CCS1 is not a standard and also that Rivian is acting anti-competitively?

Rivian will open their network to all. They’ve said they’re still in testing/refinement, which is why Rivian is making it free even for all Rivian drivers.

Sure, Tesla can claim that “testing” excuse too for now. But, then, I’d expect Tesla to relinquish control over their plug and allow anyone to charge at Superchargers via adapter and without having oems integrate the Tesla plug.

Sponsored