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

[2025R1S]

Do you have any idea how many years it takes to turn thoughts into reality here? We’ve watched chargers take more than 12 months to deploy.

A legislative bill with money attached to it is so much a fantasy for us - this money might turn into chargers the public can use come 2025….

7.5 Billion dollars from the federal government, which has stated that the chargers developed from it MUST INCLUDE CCS says otherwise.

Edit: 1.8 Billion not 7.5 Billion.

Cheers.

Sponsored

 

[2025R1S]

This is hilarious. Our roads are in such bad shape as it is. I can’t imagine them affording to install EV infrastructure in the roads - God
Have mercy on us if we need to depend on them

Wireless charging electric roads NOW!

Problem solved.

 

[COdogman]

NACS might not be a standard by definition, but it sets the standard that we all want

You’re not following. It’s not a standard at all because only 1 company uses it and controls it. Tesla has co-opted the word “standard” and most of you are blindly joining them. It’s a Tesla brand plug.

You are obviously free to prefer whatever plug and charging network you like. I’m not even commenting on the quality or reliability because Tesla has done a good job with their network so far. But it’s shortsighted to fall in line and hand Musk control over the nation’s charging infrastructure. And that is what would happen if Tesla‘s plug is considered a standard without being controlled by a consortium or independent body.

 

[docwhiz]

They should. Those manufacturers have loyal fans, large production capacity, and are all going to be offering and building more and more EVs. Tesla will continue to lose market share in the EV segment, and it’s not all going to go to Ford and GM.

ICE cars are a liability. Legacy ICE manufacturers have shown that you have to start over with a new EV design (and with new factories, suppliers and engineers). They are 5-10 years behind.

 

[docwhiz]

If Rivian come out and say "We plan to support this plan in the future", will Munroe or anyone else shut up now? I think GM and Ford is just doing lip service for now.

I think we'll all celebrate.

 

[joelster]

You’re not following. It’s not a standard at all because only 1 company uses it and controls it. Tesla has co-opted the word “standard” and most of you are blindly joining them. It’s a Tesla brand plug.

You are obviously free to prefer whatever plug and charging network you like. I’m not even commenting on the quality or reliability because Tesla has done a good job with their network so far. But it’s shortsighted to fall in line and hand Musk control over the nation’s charging infrastructure. And that is what would happen if Tesla‘s plug is considered a standard without being controlled by a consortium or independent body.

^^^ This.

And now, in addition to receiving fees for charging on his network, Musk would be getting a licensing fee for every charge port and every charger installed in the US? That ticks me off.

 

[Robin]

It's the Tesla charging port.

Ford and GM have now adopted it.

Hopefully Rivian is next. Rivian orders will go through the roof if they can use superchargers IMO

I just hope I can have one installed in my R1T, or using an adapter when it becomes available, though I hoping an aftermarket can be installed on the Rivian.

 

[MaskedRacerX]

Is this fact checked...

Yeah, it's how Ford will integrate with Tesla services for all the CCS port vehicles they're building between now and the if/when change to the Tesla connector (purportedly in 2025).

There's 3 ways a CCS vehicle can connect to a Tesla Supercharger:

1) Magic Dock - this is the Tesla solution where there's a CCS adapter that's modular, it's connected when you initiate a CCS charge, otherwise not. This uses the Tesla app, to manage and bill the charging session by selecting a stall number at a SuC location. Any CCS vehicle should be able to use this method (anyone can install the Tesla app, setup a CC, and then use the "Charge your non-Tesla" under accounts).

2) CCS using NACS - this (as described above) will allow a vehicle with CCS to connect to a stall and initiate charging and be billed fully automated, and the payment handling, session monitoring, etc., will be done through the manufacturers native app (vs. Tesla). This requires the CCS implementation on the vehicle side to be NACS compliant (i.e., auth/comm protocols) and to use an as-yet-to-be seen Tesla provided adapter - also, the manufacturer would have to have integrated with Tesla backend services (it's not like a compliant CCS port and some rogue adapter would "just work").

3) Tesla native connector (using NACS) - a physical Tesla port installed in the vehicle, NACS compliant implementation at the hardware level, and the same integration of backend services as #2 above. This really only differs in the physical implementation of the port, the user experience should be the same.

And when it comes down to it, Tesla has 2 pins for power (for both AC and DC) a ground a two data pins, and CCS1 has 2 pins for AC, 2 pins for DC - and a ground and two data pins.

We know Tesla can handle the interfacing and basic communication as we've seen in Magic Dock (so things like charge speed/ negotiation is already in place), we know CCS can fast charge a Tesla port (via their or a number of 3rd party adapters), we know J1772 is handled easily between the specs.

The main thing is that extra comm/auth information that a SuC Stall uses to interface upstream, send the vehicle/account ID, provide transaction processing, validate, trigger the charging to start - all just by plugging into the vehicle - but that's not dependent on the physical port.

 

[Autolycus]

you are quoting charin, which is a lobbying firm for CCS.

In their stats - Charin glosses over the fact there is CCS1 standard in NA and CCS2 in Europe - and they both aren’t compatible.

Charin is not an unbiased source, and is not aligned with the EV industry or consumers. Charin only cares about a plug, even if it’s inferior

CCS Type 1 and CCS Type 2 have identical communication protocols and on the DC side are identical. From the car side, the only difference between the two is the physical connector. Therefore, from a car manufacturer's perspective, they can use common components for nearly everything. With Tesla's port, the entire electric architecture has to be different.

 

[SASSquatch]

This has been covered many times already. Europe is a different situation because their domestic distribution networks deploy 3-phase AC at the local level, so charging requires 3-phase support. Only the Mennekes plug, which underpins CCS-2, supports 3-phase therefore it is the best choiceNt for their situation, even for Tesla.

North America is generally single phase at the local level, and NACS is an optimal design for our application. It is by far the best solution for North America, both technically and from a convenience perspective, and it now has unstoppable market momentum. CCS-1 will die in North America as it is displaced by NACS, but CCS-2 will continue in Europe. It is important not to confuse the two implementations.

Thanks for the clarification - I did not get into the weeds on different implementation of CCS-1 vs 2.

NACS is not superior technically to CCS-1 and CCS-1 has more applications beyond DCFS.

Not a single NACS application currently in operation supports 800v architecture which is the future for all OEMS not named Tesla. Not sure how that is technically superior even if it has the capability to do it. When the entity in control of 99% of the NACS infrastructure can decide what features the consumer will and will not get, how is that superior?

Bi-directional charging? Musk says not worth it.
800v Architecture? Musk says not worth the cost.

 

[SASSquatch]

I might have gotten that from CuthelineKyle on the InsideEVs podcast today.

+ 1 for CutthelineKyle

 

[docwhiz]

^^^ This.

And now, in addition to receiving fees for charging on his network, Musk would be getting a licensing fee for every charge port and every charger installed in the US? That ticks me off.

Which part of "free to use" don't you understand?
(Interesting to see all of the Musk hate here. Please, folks, calm down.)

 

[joelster]

Which part of "free to use" don't you understand?
(Interesting to see all of the Musk hate here. Please, folks, calm down.)

What is free to use? Please elaborate.

 

[docwhiz]

What is free to use? Please elaborate.

https://www.tesla.com/blog/opening-north-american-charging-standard

 

[Count Orlok]

if Munro is for it then...

Sponsored