That's a strawman argument. First, Tesla is not dictating anything. They are simply recommending the most sensible course of action going forward and others are free to make their own decisions, just as Tesla does.
The most common collision is a rear end. Putting the charge port on either the front or the back of the vehicle would increase repair costs in even minor collisions and cause higher insurance rates and longer repair times. The driver's side rear location can survive the most common type of rear-end collisions, regardless of which car is at fault.
Nobody is making excuses. The stations are already there. Do you want to be able to use them and/or have the maximum available to your Rivian to be used? Then consider putting it on the rear driver's side.
My only point is that car makers should have the freedom to put their chargers wherever they want and not be beholden to one company. Just like gas stations, doesn't matter where the fuel door is, the hoses will reach. EA figured this out, EVGo figured this out, etc. Tesla isn't acting like a business that wants to invite more customers, they are acting like they are doing the world a favor by opening up. And I don't think that's a good business plan.
Newer 350kW CCS stations seem to be putting in these 6 meter long cables that are on cable retractors. You could park the wrong direction and still charge a lot of EVs. No real excuse for Tesla at this point besides just penny pinching.
Yep I've started to see those too. That's even an easier way for Tesla to support other EVs. Eliminates the cost of the copper with an easy mechanical solution.
Car manufacturers should not be at the mercy of charger design when deciding where to put their charge port. It should be the other way around - if that charging network wants more vehicles to use their chargers (=more revenue), they should build chargers that all EVs can use. The simplest way to do that is longer cables. Then it won't matter where the port is located on a vehicle.
I can't imagine replacing a charge port is going to make a big difference on repair costs during a collision. EVs are already expensive to repair after a collision. And I don't see Nissan Leaf owners complaining....they've had their charge port front center for more than a decade.
I would like to add that in all those cases: EA, EVgo, etc, you are paying for transmission losses in cables. For example, I'll keep it simple, you purchase 100kwh at EVgo, long cable would have larger resistance, plus coupling losses and cabling in your EV before it gets to the battery. In the end, lets say 95kwh finally gets to your battery, but you still pay for station's metered 100kwh.
You are overstating the loss. The difference between the 2 meter V3 cable over the 3 meter V4 cable at 425 amps is about .2 kW so at 36 cents a kWh it is about 7.2 cents on a 1 hour charge and 2.4 cents on a 20 minute charge. That is assuming copper wire, if by chance it is aluminum cable it is 60% more loss but still less than 12 cents an hour so if you charge for 10 hours on a trip it is less than $1.20 for that extra meter of cable.
It’s not that easy or they would be doing it already. Part of the problem is that the V4 cable isn’t just longer, it’s also stiffer, and harder to manipulate (insert sexual innuendo here).
