What if Tesla spun off the SuperCharger network to an independent company and gave up the NACS to an independent organization?

[FrankieJ]

No not really. I bought a CCS car from Rivian at least partially on the promise it would be supported long term with Rivian and others building out infrastructure to charge it.

If my truck is now obsolete that is a real kick in the teeth but I don't really believe that as I have said a couple times these obituaries that the Tesla sheople are writing all over the forum are just overblown.

There is nothing about what Tesla has done with Ford or GM and hopefully Rivian that would make your vehicle obsolete. All you need to do is attach an adapter. No big deal!!

Sponsored

 

[SoCal Rob]

I think the reason why Tesla's supercharger network is so much superior to CCS networks is that it was designed by and run by a company that genuinely cares about its success.

Almost. It genuinely cares about its ability to sell vehicles at a profit. That focus on selling their vehicles is what concerns many people about the experience for owners of other brands as long as the Supercharger network is run by a single manufacturer.

CCS is what you get when a bunch of companies who view electric vehicles as unwanted competition design an electric vehicle charger.

I think it’s more about legacy thinking versus tech startup thinking.

If you transfer control to the same group of people responsible for CCS, you'll end up with something just as bad as CCS.

To avoid anti-EV corruption of the EV charging network, control of the north of American charging standards would need to be proportional to the North American EV market share.

Since Tesla has more than 50% market share they would have more than 50% control which means they actually have 100% control. Anti-Tesla people would not find that any better than the current state of affairs. They change in ownership/structure doesn't make anyone happy what's the point?

Elon may be a jerk, but giving Toyota equal say to Tesla how EV charging is going to work would surely result in yet another failed design. Let's not repeat what we know doesn't work (legacy automakers designing/controlling recharging experience).

Supercharger does not equal NACS. NACS is the connector, and having it governed by an independent standards organization, which would be looking at universal access to the standard for the betterment of EV adoption and backwards-compatibility, should be all that’s needed. Tying control to manufacturers rather than a standards body is a straw man argument and not what I’m suggesting.

I don’t think it would work out better keeping it tied to any vehicle manufacturer(s) as you propose, especially since as market shares change you’d potentially have a different manufacturer exerting its power over the rest. To me, that’s no better than when Tesla was in that position.

 

[DuoRivians]

I’d be on board with this

 

[DuoRivians]

I think you should make this into a poll ?

 

[zefram47]

Short of the government forcing them to, Tesla won't divest themselves of the Supercharger network. If anything, with all the upcoming competition across the sector Tesla will transition into an energy company that also makes vehicles. They already have solar, personal and grid-scale battery backup, and DC Fast Charging.

At the end of the day what we don't need is Tesla turning into Standard Oil. I want to see a lot of diversity in the suppliers of DC Fast Charging. Tesla can be a part of that if they want to fully open and allow all EVs to use them, but the plug needs to be handed over to a proper standards organization.

 

[kallisti5]

There's nothing fundamentally wrong with CCS (besides it being a chonky boi designed by a committee). The reliability issues aren't because of CCS's design, but because the largest CCS network (Electrify America) has zero interest in maintaining their network.

* EA chargers (even at *busy* sites) are down for months / years
* EA chargers are poorly written Windows Embedded / Dot Net systems that crash pretty much continuously (The fact that everyone knows EA is running Windows Embedded is enough to prove it crashes too much )
* EA chargers derate without telling you, resulting in the "CCS station dance" as you try to find something that will give you 200kW+ instead of 72kW. if you're going to derate a station due to hardware issues, communicate it so I don't have to test 4 stations to find the working one (if there is a working one)
* EA chargers are positioned at the bare minimum intervals to take a trip.

Mix the above together, and you get a *really* piss poor public opinion of CCS. Mix in unknowning people not realizing that random J1772 chargers aren't actually fast... and you get to this situation.

CCS didn't kill CCS in North America. Electrify America killed CCS in North America. EA doesn't run their network like the mission critical thing it is, they run it like vending machines in a public park.

NACS isn't going to fix this. However, NACS will at least give drivers more options for when EA sucks.

There's an argument here on why Tesla didn't just make a NACS -> CCS adapter without all this drama... but that's for another thread.

 

[crashmtb]

There's nothing fundamentally wrong with CCS (besides it being a chonky boi designed by a committee). The reliability issues aren't because of CCS's design, but because the largest CCS network (Electrify America) has zero interest in maintaining their network.

* EA chargers (even at *busy* sites) are down for months / years
* EA chargers are poorly written Windows Embedded / Dot Net systems that crash pretty much continuously (The fact that everyone knows EA is running Windows Embedded is enough to prove it crashes too much )
* EA chargers derate without telling you, resulting in the "CCS station dance" as you try to find something that will give you 200kW+ instead of 72kW. if you're going to derate a station due to hardware issues, communicate it so I don't have to test 4 stations to find the working one (if there is a working one)
* EA chargers are positioned at the bare minimum intervals to take a trip.

Mix the above together, and you get a *really* piss poor public opinion of CCS. Mix in unknowning people not realizing that random J1772 chargers aren't actually fast... and you get to this situation.

CCS didn't kill CCS in North America. Electrify America killed CCS in North America. EA doesn't run their network like the mission critical thing it is, they run it like vending machines in a public park.

NACS isn't going to fix this. However, NACS will at least give drivers more options for when EA sucks.

There's an argument here on why Tesla didn't just make a NACS -> CCS adapter without all this drama... but that's for another thread.

I don’t understand why charging stations don’t just operate the same way as a pay at the pump gas dispenser does. Don’t need some crazy windows based HMI.


Also, Tesla *did* do a tesla connector to CCS adapter, they’ve called it magic dock.

 

[SASSquatch]

Yea, I’d be cool with that. But it makes no sense in Tesla’s part. This is a growth industry that they are extremely well positioned to dominate. It would be foolish to doing it off.

Why should Tesla, a private company, be in a position to dominate charging infrastructure, which should be driven by a free market?

Is there a gas station that controls all gas stations?

 

[SASSquatch]

There's nothing fundamentally wrong with CCS (besides it being a chonky boi designed by a committee). The reliability issues aren't because of CCS's design, but because the largest CCS network (Electrify America) has zero interest in maintaining their network.

* EA chargers (even at *busy* sites) are down for months / years
* EA chargers are poorly written Windows Embedded / Dot Net systems that crash pretty much continuously (The fact that everyone knows EA is running Windows Embedded is enough to prove it crashes too much )
* EA chargers derate without telling you, resulting in the "CCS station dance" as you try to find something that will give you 200kW+ instead of 72kW. if you're going to derate a station due to hardware issues, communicate it so I don't have to test 4 stations to find the working one (if there is a working one)
* EA chargers are positioned at the bare minimum intervals to take a trip.

Mix the above together, and you get a *really* piss poor public opinion of CCS. Mix in unknowning people not realizing that random J1772 chargers aren't actually fast... and you get to this situation.

CCS didn't kill CCS in North America. Electrify America killed CCS in North America. EA doesn't run their network like the mission critical thing it is, they run it like vending machines in a public park.

NACS isn't going to fix this. However, NACS will at least give drivers more options for when EA sucks.

There's an argument here on why Tesla didn't just make a NACS -> CCS adapter without all this drama... but that's for another thread.

Somebody please pay this man!

Well said.

 

[SASSquatch]

I’ve been reading the back-and-forth on the various charging threads and I’ve been trying to come up with a solution which makes most people happy. As if.

The closest I got is this: Tesla spins off the SuperCharger network into a separate profit-driven company so there is no favoritism among vehicle manufacturers, with that as a permanent part of the new company’s mission statement. Tesla releases all claim to any control over the NACS connector specifications to an independent body.

This would allow consumers to use SuperChargers (regardless of connector type) which are not controlled by a single vehicle manufacturer and it would allow manufacturers to include the NACS connector without being at the mercy of a competitor.

Would that make most people happy? I know that I could live with that.

Yes, please. You've hit the nail on the head. Well said.

 

[kallisti5]

Also, Tesla *did* do a tesla connector to CCS adapter, they’ve called it magic dock.

There's like 10 sites with those. I'm not 100% on why they installed magic docks when most people are ok just buying a $200 adapter.

 

[SoCal Rob]

I think you should make this into a poll ?

I guess it’s too late with this thread.

 

[SoCal Rob]

Yea, I’d be cool with that. But it makes no sense in Tesla’s part. This is a growth industry that they are extremely well positioned to dominate. It would be foolish to doing it off.

I thought about this some more, and the “dominate” part is exactly what concerns me, and probably others.

The issue with the network being under Tesla’s control, I think, is that at any moment they can change pricing, availability, or charging speed if it furthers their purpose in selling vehicles. We’ve already seen that Teslas may get preferential pricing.

Imagine if Tesla implemented a rule such that 25% of available chargers at a site will always be reserved for Tesla vehicles. So, if you pull up to a site with 4 pedestals and 3 of them are occupied by a Hyundai, a Ford, and a Mercedes, you cannot initiate a charging session in your Rivian but a Tesla can.

Along those same lines, what if Tesla throttles the charging speed on non-Teslas to provide faster charging for Teslas at the same Supercharger? Or, what if tasked with cutting demand during peak power usage, Superchargers reduce demand by supplying less (or zero) power to non-Teslas first?

Maybe I am too distrustful of large corporations, but these shenanigans are what I’m picturing if Tesla controls the network. Heck, they could be the lowest price and highest availability for all… until they’ve driven most competition out of the business. THEN they start the shenanigans.

 

[SASSquatch]

There's like 10 sites with those. I'm not 100% on why they installed magic docks when most people are ok just buying a $200 adapter.

Most nerds like us are ok with it. I think, however, if you tell the average american that they have to spend $200 to buy something just to use a fuel station, it only adds to the reason most americans in polls don't want to purchase an EV.

Charging infrastructure needs to be ubiquitous, reliable, and simple to use. Needing to cary around adapters is not part of that equation IMHO.

 

[zefram47]

Along those same lines, what if Tesla throttles the charging speed on non-Teslas to provide faster charging for Teslas at the same Supercharger? Or, what if tasked with cutting demand during peak power usage, Superchargers reduce demand by supplying less (or zero) power to non-Teslas first?

I think it's safe to say that throttling charging speed will never be something you'll have to worry about. It's in everyone's best interest to get every car in and out as fast as possible.

Sponsored