Top 5 Reasons Switching to a Tesla Dominated NACS Standard is a Colossal Mistake for the Consumer

[Ozmt]

Top 5 Reasons Switching to a NACS Port is a Colossal Mistake for the Consumer:

1.) It will limit innovation: Tesla's system, by design, is limited to 500v. CCS can support 1000v architecture. All of these companies developing 800v architecture for their next generation models, including Rivian, would effectively be forced to go back to 400 or 500v. That means that you will have a significantly slower charging speed vs. a comparable CCS system.

Edit: As others have pointed out, the NACS system has a theoretical capability to achieve 1000v but there are no existing working Superchargers that have this capability and Elon Musk has repeatedly stated Tesla has no plans to support an 800v architecture.

2.) It will cost more: Elon Musk wants to make money off of you, and the OEMS could care less: Please remember this fact. Non-Tesla vehicles are charged significantly more for using a Supercharger than native Tesla owners. That will never change.

3.) It will create a tiered class system: Tesla will always, and I mean always, prioritize its own customers when it comes to user support and user experience. This is the only way they will incentivize future owners to buy Tesla in the future. When the proverbial shit hits the fan, Tesla will turn around and blame the OEM for not implementing a software change, or hardware update, etc. Welcome to the world of Apple (Tesla) vs. Android (CCS).

4.) It will create a degraded and inefficient user experience: All existing Tesla Superchargers are designed with cabling, stall positions, and architecture for Tesla vehicles. Non-Tesla vehicles do not have the ports in the correct position which means you can either not charge at all, or you have to block another charger by positioning your non-Tesla vehicle at an awkward angle. If your vehicle supports 800v architecture like the Kia EV6, you will have significantly decreased charging speed. This cannot be easily addressed by an adapter.

5.) It invites a madman into your vehicle: You are allowing Elon Musk, purveyor of chaos and who single handedly destroyed Twitter to control your charging experience. Elon Musk will always prioritize his interests and the interests of Tesla. Irrespective of any agreements, all other OEMs are competitors. Imagine the information he can obtain from your vehicle, driver history, specifications, charging curves, etc. by controlling the charging experience. He will absolutely use that information to the advantage of Tesla and to the detriment of every other OEM.

I agree with each of your points except the last. I'm truly not a musk fan, really not, but I do believe he is an evil genius. From paypal, which I

Top 5 Reasons Switching to a NACS Port is a Colossal Mistake for the Consumer:

1.) It will limit innovation: Tesla's system, by design, is limited to 500v. CCS can support 1000v architecture. All of these companies developing 800v architecture for their next generation models, including Rivian, would effectively be forced to go back to 400 or 500v. That means that you will have a significantly slower charging speed vs. a comparable CCS system.

Edit: As others have pointed out, the NACS system has a theoretical capability to achieve 1000v but there are no existing working Superchargers that have this capability and Elon Musk has repeatedly stated Tesla has no plans to support an 800v architecture.

2.) It will cost more: Elon Musk wants to make money off of you, and the OEMS could care less: Please remember this fact. Non-Tesla vehicles are charged significantly more for using a Supercharger than native Tesla owners. That will never change.

3.) It will create a tiered class system: Tesla will always, and I mean always, prioritize its own customers when it comes to user support and user experience. This is the only way they will incentivize future owners to buy Tesla in the future. When the proverbial shit hits the fan, Tesla will turn around and blame the OEM for not implementing a software change, or hardware update, etc. Welcome to the world of Apple (Tesla) vs. Android (CCS).

4.) It will create a degraded and inefficient user experience: All existing Tesla Superchargers are designed with cabling, stall positions, and architecture for Tesla vehicles. Non-Tesla vehicles do not have the ports in the correct position which means you can either not charge at all, or you have to block another charger by positioning your non-Tesla vehicle at an awkward angle. If your vehicle supports 800v architecture like the Kia EV6, you will have significantly decreased charging speed. This cannot be easily addressed by an adapter.

5.) It invites a madman into your vehicle: You are allowing Elon Musk, purveyor of chaos and who single handedly destroyed Twitter to control your charging experience. Elon Musk will always prioritize his interests and the interests of Tesla. Irrespective of any agreements, all other OEMs are competitors. Imagine the information he can obtain from your vehicle, driver history, specifications, charging curves, etc. by controlling the charging experience. He will absolutely use that information to the advantage of Tesla and to the detriment of every other OEM.

I agree with your points except the last. I'm truly not a fan of Musk but I do believe he's an evil genius. From paypal, which I despise, to Tesla to space x, he's bluffed his way through and had been able to drive forward even when faced with huge failures. His bs claims are just brushed sside because he made great strides in some areas. Musk fans are mostly fanatics like so many apple users I know. They'll defend them to the death, right or wrong. Is ccs1 the best we can do? I don't think so but it's the standard the government in the USA and Europe have chosen. European Tesla are required to use ccs2. This is exactly like the vhs/beta max fight. The apple vs android fight is similar but they are both doing well. It's that our future? Charging stations with an open architecture (ccs1) or a system held by a for profit corporation that could lock us out whenever they choose and force us to pay whatever they choose.

Sponsored

 

[moosetags]

All that really care about is that I can get a fast charge for my Rivian when I'm on the road. I don't care if I get it from Electrify America, Tesla Supercharger, or Burger King. I just want a dependable fast charge. This is the single issue that will make Electric Vehicles mainstream.

We love driving our Rivian. It is probably the best pick-up truck available. The only problem with our R1T is its range when pulling our Airstream Travel Trailer. If the Tesla Supercharger System were to become readily available for our use, our problem would be solved.

When an NACS to CCS adapter becomes available, we will get one and be on our way down the road. We do not particularly care who is making money on our charging sessions as we do not care who is making money on our Diesel fuel purchases. We just want the same convenience for our EV as we have always had for our ICE vehicle.

Brian

 

[izgoy]

Top 5 Reasons Switching to a NACS Port is a Colossal Mistake for the Consumer:

1.) It will limit innovation: Tesla's system, by design, is limited to 500v. CCS can support 1000v architecture. All of these companies developing 800v architecture for their next generation models, including Rivian, would effectively be forced to go back to 400 or 500v. That means that you will have a significantly slower charging speed vs. a comparable CCS system.

Edit: As others have pointed out, the NACS system has a theoretical capability to achieve 1000v but there are no existing working Superchargers that have this capability and Elon Musk has repeatedly stated Tesla has no plans to support an 800v architecture.

2.) It will cost more: Elon Musk wants to make money off of you, and the OEMS could care less: Please remember this fact. Non-Tesla vehicles are charged significantly more for using a Supercharger than native Tesla owners. That will never change.

3.) It will create a tiered class system: Tesla will always, and I mean always, prioritize its own customers when it comes to user support and user experience. This is the only way they will incentivize future owners to buy Tesla in the future. When the proverbial shit hits the fan, Tesla will turn around and blame the OEM for not implementing a software change, or hardware update, etc. Welcome to the world of Apple (Tesla) vs. Android (CCS).

4.) It will create a degraded and inefficient user experience: All existing Tesla Superchargers are designed with cabling, stall positions, and architecture for Tesla vehicles. Non-Tesla vehicles do not have the ports in the correct position which means you can either not charge at all, or you have to block another charger by positioning your non-Tesla vehicle at an awkward angle. If your vehicle supports 800v architecture like the Kia EV6, you will have significantly decreased charging speed. This cannot be easily addressed by an adapter.

5.) It invites a madman into your vehicle: You are allowing Elon Musk, purveyor of chaos and who single handedly destroyed Twitter to control your charging experience. Elon Musk will always prioritize his interests and the interests of Tesla. Irrespective of any agreements, all other OEMs are competitors. Imagine the information he can obtain from your vehicle, driver history, specifications, charging curves, etc. by controlling the charging experience. He will absolutely use that information to the advantage of Tesla and to the detriment of every other OEM.

1. A lie
2. A lie
3. A lie
4. A lie
5. An opinion of a hater

 

[Donald Stanfield]

1. A lie
2. A lie
3. A lie
4. A lie
5. An opinion of a hater

You know that's not really a rebuttal right? Why bother if all you're going to do in response to his post is to plug your ears and say nuh uh?

 

[COdogman]

1. A lie
2. A lie
3. A lie
4. A lie
5. An opinion of a hater

 

[opnwide]

 

[jjswan33]

1. A lie
2. A lie
3. A lie
4. A lie
5. An opinion of a hater

You are a very skilled debater… king of the debate club and having your opinion and insight here is a blessing to all of us.

?

 

[av8or]

Wow some are sure passionate about this! I’ve never once pondered who was profiting from the handle at the gas station. Gas is gas and electrons are electrons, we just need an easy efficient way to get them in the car.

The market will sort this out, and it’s starting to look like the market has spoken. If you don’t like Tesla, don’t go to a supercharger. Easy.

I wonder how many here arguing against this will forget all about it in a couple years and secretly be using superchargers for road trips because they don’t want to waste time with the “other guys”.

 

[Autolycus]

Not actually a fact at all… lol. The bill requires the station charges any type of vehicle, which of course CCS. It does not specify the CCS1 connector. That can be met with an adaptor or magic dock today.

The statute doesn't specify the connector, but the implementing regs most definitely do specify CCS1 (formally called CCS Type 1).

(c) Connector type. All charging connectors must meet applicable industry standards. Each DCFC charging port must be capable of charging any CCS-compliant vehicle and each DCFC charging port must have at least one permanently attached CCS Type 1 connector. In addition, permanently attached CHAdeMO ( www.chademo.com) connectors can be provided using only FY2022 NEVI Funds. Each AC Level 2 charging port must have a permanently attached J1772 connector and must charge any J1772-compliant vehicle.

As the White House said yesterday, funds can go to stations with ports other than CCS1, but any station built with funds must work with any CCS vehicle and must include a permanently attached CCS1 connector on at least 4 pedestals. It's not clear if funds can be used on 80% of the full cost of something like a 16-pedestal site with just 4 CCS1 plugs.

Wow some are sure passionate about this! I’ve never once pondered who was profiting from the handle at the gas station. Gas is gas and electrons are electrons, we just need an easy efficient way to get them in the car.

You've never had to worry about it because Ford doesn't own half of the gas stations, charge more for a Jeep to fill up than a Ford, and control every aspect of the pump even at stations it doesn't own..

 

[BCondrey]

Top 5 Reasons Switching to a NACS Port is a Colossal Mistake for the Consumer:

1.) It will limit innovation: Tesla's system, by design, is limited to 500v. CCS can support 1000v architecture. All of these companies developing 800v architecture for their next generation models, including Rivian, would effectively be forced to go back to 400 or 500v. That means that you will have a significantly slower charging speed vs. a comparable CCS system.

Edit: As others have pointed out, the NACS system has a theoretical capability to achieve 1000v but there are no existing working Superchargers that have this capability and Elon Musk has repeatedly stated Tesla has no plans to support an 800v architecture.

2.) It will cost more: Elon Musk wants to make money off of you, and the OEMS could care less: Please remember this fact. Non-Tesla vehicles are charged significantly more for using a Supercharger than native Tesla owners. That will never change.

3.) It will create a tiered class system: Tesla will always, and I mean always, prioritize its own customers when it comes to user support and user experience. This is the only way they will incentivize future owners to buy Tesla in the future. When the proverbial shit hits the fan, Tesla will turn around and blame the OEM for not implementing a software change, or hardware update, etc. Welcome to the world of Apple (Tesla) vs. Android (CCS).

4.) It will create a degraded and inefficient user experience: All existing Tesla Superchargers are designed with cabling, stall positions, and architecture for Tesla vehicles. Non-Tesla vehicles do not have the ports in the correct position which means you can either not charge at all, or you have to block another charger by positioning your non-Tesla vehicle at an awkward angle. If your vehicle supports 800v architecture like the Kia EV6, you will have significantly decreased charging speed. This cannot be easily addressed by an adapter.

5.) It invites a madman into your vehicle: You are allowing Elon Musk, purveyor of chaos and who single handedly destroyed Twitter to control your charging experience. Elon Musk will always prioritize his interests and the interests of Tesla. Irrespective of any agreements, all other OEMs are competitors. Imagine the information he can obtain from your vehicle, driver history, specifications, charging curves, etc. by controlling the charging experience. He will absolutely use that information to the advantage of Tesla and to the detriment of every other OEM.

On a related note, Munroe did a good youtube vid of the internal difference between NACS and CCS, as they are implemented in cars. Tesla/NACS has advantages and demonstrates more innovation, where CCS is more old-school ICE mindset. It is worth a watch. Also describes why converting one to the other on an existing vehicle is not possible. (42) Ford's Bold Move: Embracing Tesla's Charging Standard for Electric Vehicles - YouTube

 

[HaveBlue]

Other points:
Lucid also is 800v
Kyle says v3 superchargers could be adapted for 900v
There is only Tesla left to drive future innovation in the nacs connector if we adopt it.
The supercharger network is more reliable.
Tesla and rivian are locked in a lawsuit currently.

 

[jjswan33]

Wow some are sure passionate about this! I’ve never once pondered who was profiting from the handle at the gas station. Gas is gas and electrons are electrons, we just need an easy efficient way to get them in the car.

The market will sort this out, and it’s starting to look like the market has spoken. If you don’t like Tesla, don’t go to a supercharger. Easy.

I wonder how many here arguing against this will forget all about it in a couple years and secretly be using superchargers for road trips because they don’t want to waste time with the “other guys”.

Not me because I don’t want to pay more for a slower charge. We will see what the market dictates but these obituaries are all very premature and I am also very curious to see how the SC network reliability holds up when it is no longer a closed system only for Tesla.

So some facts for people who don’t like speculation:

EA is $.36/kWh for anyone with half a brain and the SC network is >$.50/kWh in most cases. Second most of the Tesla SC stations that people are so eager to get access to are not very fast and that EA station down the street is very much capable of giving my Rivian >200kW and the reliability and availability of CCS is only going to improve with RAN buildout and EA replacing old stations with new hardware and adding new stations (this is already happening).

Last of all there is speculation if Tesla would even let Rivian on and that in itself is the bigger problem. Elon decides and if NACS is to be the standard under those condition he would dictate who the winners and losers are… not great for the consumer.

 

[SASSquatch]

Wow some are sure passionate about this! I’ve never once pondered who was profiting from the handle at the gas station. Gas is gas and electrons are electrons, we just need an easy efficient way to get them in the car.

The market will sort this out, and it’s starting to look like the market has spoken. If you don’t like Tesla, don’t go to a supercharger. Easy.

I wonder how many here arguing against this will forget all about it in a couple years and secretly be using superchargers for road trips because they don’t want to waste time with the “other guys”.

I am 100% with you that the market will sort this out - it always does. And I want to make something clear, I am pro-consumer in this opinion, not anti-Tesla or even pro-CCS.

I want mass adoption of EVs at a scale that is necessary for us to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and I want us to get there as quickly as possible.

Trying to force a single standard, and then having one private entity, like Tesla, have a dominant hand in that standard is IMHO not the way to ensure the best experience for the consumer.

I don't even have a problem with the NACS port. In many respects, it is easier for the consumer to use. The problem I have is that it is dominated by Tesla even if other OEMS adopt the port, GM and Ford have made clear they don't want anything to do with building out a network and they would prefer handing over money to Elon Musk and having him do it.

That isn't going to democratize NACS, it will mean Tesla will have a dominant position in building and servicing NACS Superchargers and deciding what if anything you the consumer should get.

Elon has already stated he doesn't believe in the value of bi-directional charging. So, for those of you ready to jump on the NACS bandwagon, hope you weren't planning on that.

He has already said that the cost to go to 800v architecture is not worth the savings, so even though NACS is capable of 800v he doesn't have plans to do it. There was speculation it might be used for the Cyber Truck, or the Tesla Semi but there are no demonstration units that have ever been developed.

Then there is cost. How do you keep the cost down for the consumer if there is one player who is dominating control of most of the charging? You need competition to drive innovation and to keep costs down.

CCS is an open standard that not one player in the market has dominant control over. Just like gas stations don't have control over the gas drilling and refining. There are dozens of gas station brands all competing for you to get gas with them.

If NACS was truly more open, and Tesla didn't dominate the NACS market, I'd be much more open to it.

Please also keep in mind. Ford and GM don't give two shits about the consumer. Their deal was absolutely about conserving cash. They decided it was better for them as a company to pay a ransom to Elon Musk and let him worry about building out Superchargers then for them to invest money they had already claimed they were going to invest to help build out a fast charge network.

They absolutely abdicated responsibility for the consumer charging experience to a competitor who has only opened up the NACS standard when money was available from the government to do so.

NACS was never really designed to be open - otherwise the charging stations, all 12,000 of them would have been designed so that any vehicle with a charger point in a different location might be able to use them.

 

[Ladiver]

I am a hater of Elon Musk. I trust absolutely NOTHING that he says. Sure, he can hit a grand slam 5% of the time, but 95% it is all BS.

if Chevy does use NACS, I will flip my very low preorder SivleradoEV. If Rivian also switches, then my fun with EVs stops at the R1T and R1S.

In a world being bought by Elon, I will drive a big V-8 sports car or a diesel truck.

I think allowing the small European commuter diesels, getting 50-60 mpg or more would be a great solution here too! Unfortunately, that will never happen.

 

[jbowen52]

As more and more vehicles switch to the NACS standard, the current CCS suppliers EA, EVGo and others will have to also switch to offering NACS charging which would ultimately create competition with Tesla Supercharging. It's available now with a CCS to Tesla adapter. With that, most of the initial arguments fall apart.

Sponsored