POLL: Would you like Rivian to adopt NACS Tesla charging standard?

[manitou202]

It looks like Tesla really has opened the standard to everyone, including competitive DCFC equipment manufacturers. So those of you who were complaining that you would be stuck with a monopoly SC network are simply wrong.

On the surface it looks like Tesla is giving away one of their biggest competitive advantages. Musk has always said his objective is to expand the use of BEVs, and he has said more competition is better. Well, he is putting his money where his mouth is. It will be interesting to see if this move helps or hurts Tesla in the long run.

https://electrek.co/2023/06/09/tesla-nacs-domino-ev-charging-companies-adopting-standard/

So why can't I buy an adapter and charge my Rivian at a Tesla Supercharger?

Hint: it's still not an open standard.

Sponsored

 

[COdogman]

This point is what many are failing to realize. EA switching to NACS doesn't solve their reliability problems.

And if Tesla were to open up all of their chargers to any EV by means of an adapter tomorrow, it would be a $hit show. Half the stalls would be blocked because of the short cables and Tesla specific spacing, many 800V EVs would charge slower on Tesla units (Ioniq, Taycan, Lucid, etc), and a bunch of slow charging EVs like Bolts and Niros would be hogging Tesla chargers.

There is also a decent chance they would run into some compatibility problems. I doubt Tesla has tested all competitor EVs on their network to see if there are issues. A decent percentage of charging issues on CCS today are the vehicle, not the charger. This may get worse on a charging standard not fully tested with a variety of EVs.

Agree 100%.

Unfortunately it seems like way too many people are not thinking about the bigger picture regarding this move. To some, Tesla = good charging and that is all they need to know. Nothing else matters.

 

[bhopkins]

I just don’t see that big of a difference between a CCS and an NACS connector. I came to Rivian from Tesla so I’m familiar with both. From my standpoint, it is a connector that connects to the car. You insert, it clicks, it connects. I really don’t car what the “form” of the connector is.

Now, I will say the Tesla Supercharger network is superior to EA, EVGO, Chargepoint in terms of availability, always working, ease of use, etc. However, I wonder how long that will continue when other vehicles start to use the Supercharger network. Tesla has had an advantage in that they controlled both ends (charger and car) so they could easily make things seamless (sort of like Apple as long as you stay within the ecosystem). When the Superchargers have to start connecting to Fords, GMs, and Teslas, let’s see if it remains seamless and easy.

 

[theyoungone]

I voted no, but if control of Tesla’s plug is transferred to an independent body I would possibly vote yes.

This. Until it’s turned over to an independent body that controls the standard, I’ll never be for Rivian using NACS.

 

[theyoungone]

Agree 100%.

Unfortunately it seems like way too many people are not thinking about the bigger picture regarding this move. To some, Tesla = good charging and that is all they need to know. Nothing else matters.

!!!! gosh I don’t always agree with you but you seem to get this and I wish more saw it like you ?

 

[Dark-Fx]

Okay… twist my arm. I’ll accept switching out CCS1 for CCS2 in the US.

At least it’s run by a proper standards board

And the potential of what's essentially a medium speed AC that would require a lot less investment in infrastructure. Lots of situations where charging my Rivian at 43kW would be useful.

There are a lot of assumptions going on in this thread. Let's assume this,

Let's just make more assumptions because the terms of the agreement probably dictated they can't share the terms of the agreement. Does that sound like openness to you?

It looks like Tesla really has opened the standard to everyone, including competitive DCFC equipment manufacturers. So those of you who were complaining that you would be stuck with a monopoly SC network are simply wrong.

Tesla's release was basically just a public broadcast of their next step. Nothing in the release is requiring them to continue to do that in the future.

Tesla could make all kinds of decisions on NACSv2 that mean older vehicles from other manufacturers have issues with the change without support from the manufacturer.

Tesla knows Tesla is agile enough to deal with retrofits on older vehicles and they know that a lot of the Legacy manufacturers are not and don't display interest in maintaining or updating them either.

People will claim "Tesla wouldn't do that" but the fact is that they can. And we won't know if they will until it happens. All they need to do is put themselves in a situation where it is not just their decision on forward changes as the technology continues to mature in the future, to eliminate that possiblity and the majority of my concern about this move.

 

[COdogman]

!!!! gosh I don’t always agree with you but you seem to get this and I wish more saw it like you ?

I‘m glad not everyone agrees with me - that sounds boring!?

 

[docwhiz]

Only under certain terms:

1. Tesla relinquishes all IP around NACS and surrounding charging patents, including how AC v DC switching occurs on vehicle side via the 2 pins on NACS

2. NACS standards board becomes an independent third party, where all members of the board get to determine how NACS evolves over time.

3. All vehicles of any brand with NACS compatibility get access to Superchargers. This point matters, because the only reason we're talking about this is because people want Supercharger access. (We wouldn't be talking about this if the debate is about whether EA should adopt NACS or CCS)

Otherwise, I would prefer to keep CCS. The last thing I want to see is EV adoption/growth done on Tesla's terms.

They've already said that is their intention.

 

[theyoungone]

I‘m glad not everyone agrees with me - that sounds boring!?

I’m sure plenty of people here have a STEM background but in my head I’m just like how do you not all understand how this works? Just because NACS are more well maintained does NOT mean Rivian should switch - at all. It’s a standard. That Tesla created, owns, and has all proprietary rights too. And after watching how Elon switched things at a WHIM with Twitter, I do not want the charging standard for majority of the cars in America to be dictated by HIM. So yeah. Issa no for me dawg.

 

[SSteveEV]

Surprised by the 60% yes result here (at this time). After reading everything it sounds like the results from different polls would be:

Prefers Tesla/NACS plug form factor: 95% yes
Prefers a real standard controlled by 3rd party: 95% yes
Prefers open supercharger access: 95% yes
Wants to know if the two are linked in this poll: 90% yes

But since we don't know what the deal is with supercharger access I voted no so as to not stifle competition and expansion of CCS charger rollout. Especially because these deals are 1.5-2.5 years out and that'll cause a slowdown in charging investment.

This poll, while interesting, needed a couple more options for the selections. Such as others said with supercharger opening or not. Or if also own a Tesla or not for garage charger impacts.

 

[COdogman]

I’m sure plenty of people here have a STEM background but in my head I’m just like how do you not all understand how this works? Just because NACS are more well maintained does NOT mean Rivian should switch - at all. It’s a standard. That Tesla created, owns, and has all proprietary rights too. And after watching how Elon switched things at a WHIM with Twitter, I do not want the charging standard for majority of the cars in America to be dictated by HIM. So yeah. Issa no for me dawg.

Couldn’t agree more. It is really blowing my mind how quickly so many people were willing to declare CCS dead and buried and hand everything over to Tesla.

 

[TexasBob]

Sold!

This is the point. CCS2 has a compelling case to make. CCS1 does not. I would vote for CCS2 every time. But since CCS2 is not an option, I am glad we are moving to NACS in the US.

 

[Ozmt]

I voted no, but if control of Tesla’s plug is transferred to an independent body I would possibly vote yes.

I feel exactly the same way. As long as tesla owns the process, I want nothing to do with it. If it is transferred out of their hands, I'll vote yes. There would be nothing we could do if musk decided to block so non tesla one day. Sure, someone could sue them but in the meantime, if you're stuck with only tesla chargers, you'd be out of luck, and electrons

 

[mkhuffman]

So why can't I buy an adapter and charge my Rivian at a Tesla Supercharger?

Hint: it's still not an open standard.

The NACS standard is open, but the SC network is not. I am pretty sure you know this.

The SC network is not "open", but it will be for Ford and GM vehicles. And I am sure if Rivian works out a deal with Tesla, it will be open to Rivians also.

I don't see the point in Rivian switching to NACS unless they also get on the SC network or unless EA and all the others switch to NACS also. Which they could.

 

[COdogman]

The NACS standard is open, but the SC network is not. I am pretty sure you know this.

The SC network is not "open", but it will be for Ford and GM vehicles. And I am sure if Rivian works out a deal with Tesla, it will be open to Rivians also.

I don't see the point in Rivian switching to NACS unless they also get on the SC network or unless EA and all the others switch to NACS also. Which they could.

Tesla’s patents are not open. They own those patents and have simply pledged to not sue anyone who uses them as long as TESLA decides they are acting in “good faith,” which is also defined by TESLA in this situation. That’s why no one for years has been taking advantage of this.

it’s nothing more than a PR talking point.

Sponsored