Ford/Tesla Deal: Access to Superchargers, adapter coming, future EVs will have NACS (Tesla) port

[Longreach]

CCS1 and CCS2 are the same size. Your notion that just because “NACS is smaller and as a result is better” is false.

All else equal, saving a $1 in costs makes sense, but this isn’t an all else equal comparison. Marrying further into Tesla’s IP has definite strategic costs that far negate an all else equal comparison.

All that the US market needs is an *external NACS to CCS adapter*. Then, all superchargers will instantly become available to all EVs too, without needing integrated NACS ports. This adapter also solves the case that we end up with two charging standards in the US.

Charging network will become a commodity, and ultimately the plug type shouldn’t determine which one “wins”. If NACS and all down-the-line to inverter patents were freely given up by Tesla, this would be a different topic today. But they’re not, and again, no company would be foolish to give up an important part of their hardware to Tesla’s effective control, unless they got something big out of it.

CCS networks are getting a huge incentive via IRA’s NEVI funding.

Side note: looking back at your comments here, I find a pattern of using big words and/or illustration of “knowing it all”. Yet, I can’t find anything that actually turns out to be true as you predicted.

- CCS-1 and CCS-2 are different for reasons explained, do some homework
- Tesla has opened NACS IP, so no issue; Back end protocol is actually same as CCS, do some homework
- No one ‘wants’ adapters, they put up with them waiting for the proper solution
- Everyone wants one plug, right now there might be significant momentum to the most popular and successful one so far
- NEVI funding does not define CCS VS NACS plug, do some homework
- Sounds like you are just being a bit paranoid which is blurring the reality

Nothing more really to be said here…
End

Sponsored

 

[DuoRivians]

- CCS-1 and CCS-2 are different for reasons explained, do some homework
- Tesla has opened NACS IP, so no issue; Back end protocol is actually same as CCS, do some homework
- No one ‘wants’ adapters, they put up with them waiting for the proper solution
- Everyone wants one plug, right now there might be significant momentum to the most popular and successful one so far
- NEVI funding does not define CCS VS NACS plug, do some homework
- Sounds like you are just being a bit paranoid which is blurring the reality

Nothing more really to be said here…
End

- Tesla NACS IP being open is not the same as being given up. It is still based on “good faith” use principles. Do some homework.
- People don’t mind adapters, they just want more access to reliable chargers.
- NEVI funding absolutely depends on CCS:
“Each NEVI-funded DC fast charge station will have a minimum of four 150 kW combined Charging System (CCS) connectors and total station power of 600 kW.” https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-...-electric-vehicle-infrastructure-program-nevi As you said, do some homework.
- “
Connector Types
This final rule establishes a requirement that each DCFC port must have a Combined Charging System (CCS) Type 1 connectors. This final rule also allows DCFC charging ports to have other non-proprietary connectors so long as each DCFC charging port is capable of charging a CCS-compliant vehicle.”
https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...cle-infrastructure-standards-and-requirements
- So if Tesla wants to get NEVI funding by providing NACS to CCS adapters, that works for me
- Sounds like you just like hearing yourself being smart

 

[COdogman]

- CCS-1 and CCS-2 are different for reasons explained, do some homework
- Tesla has opened NACS IP, so no issue; Back end protocol is actually same as CCS, do some homework
- No one ‘wants’ adapters, they put up with them waiting for the proper solution
- Everyone wants one plug, right now there might be significant momentum to the most popular and successful one so far
- NEVI funding does not define CCS VS NACS plug, do some homework
- Sounds like you are just being a bit paranoid which is blurring the reality

Nothing more really to be said here…
End

CCS is the standard for NEVI funding.

White House confirms NEVI requirements; gets Tesla on board
Feb 15, 2023 - 02:27 pm
The US government has set the final requirements for its “Made in America” EV charging stations to qualify for the 7.5 billion dollar subsidy programme and NEVI. As leaked in advance, CCS is the new standard, and this time, Tesla is specifically on board.

Today’s requirements largely correspond to reports from earlier in the week. The White House has made using the CCS fast-charging standard a condition for anyone wanting to receive subsidies.

https://www.electrive.com/2023/02/15/white-house-confirms-nevi-requirements-gets-tesla-on-board/

 

[docwhiz]

It doesn't make the charge port dangerously unusable if the DC charging contactors get welded shut.

CCS has the same problem in the very unlikely event that the relay contacts weld shut.

 

[Dark-Fx]

All that the US market needs is an *external NACS to CCS adapter*. Then, all superchargers will instantly become available to all EVs too, without needing integrated NACS ports. This adapter also solves the case that we end up with two charging standards in the US.

It's obvious to me that Tesla doesn't want that or said adapter would already exist and be sold by Tesla. They could probably set the price at 500% of cost and still sell all the adapters they could make. If the adapter was designed to work with Tesla's proprietary protocol and do the translation to CCS then it wouldn't matter what version of station it is either.

 

[cdub]

In a world where things never fail, maybe true. I don't live in that world though.

There are millions of Tesla's on the road. This has NEVER been an issue.

 

[Dark-Fx]

There are millions of Tesla's on the road. This has NEVER been an issue.

Do you really have knowledge of every single Tesla repair?

 

[cdub]

Do you really have knowledge of every single Tesla repair?

Yes.

You think this would have happened and we WOULDN'T have heard about it in the forums?

 

[Dark-Fx]

Yes.

You think this would have happened and we WOULDN'T have heard about it in the forums?

"I haven't heard of it happening so it hasn't happened" I gotcha.

 

[cdub]

"I haven't heard of it happening so it hasn't happened" I gotcha.

People complain about EVERYTHING on the Tesla forums. If it happened we would KNOW. There are millions of these cars and they've been on the road for 13 years.

 

[Yossarian]

It's obvious to me that Tesla doesn't want that or said adapter would already exist and be sold by Tesla. They could probably set the price at 500% of cost and still sell all the adapters they could make. If the adapter was designed to work with Tesla's proprietary protocol and do the translation to CCS then it wouldn't matter what version of station it is either.

I think I understand what you're saying about a J1772 to NACS adapter from Tesla - something with built in firmware that allows it to be used on the SC network out of the box. But won't this existing (and relatively inexpensive) adapter from Lectron allow non-Teslas to use the SC charging network IF the needed software changes were in place?

It's understandable that Tesla doesn't want to surrender what is a big competitive advantage for them for litle gain. They seem to be OK with doing so when there is sufficient financial incentive however. Back in February, for example, that incentive seemed to be access to IRA grant funding. It's not clear if that was enough however - as far as I can tell the only concrete result was that Tesla retrofitted a handful of charging stations with the Magic Dock apparatus. The recent arrangement with Ford must also be financially attractive to Tesla or they would not have entered into it.

I'm a greenhorn in the EV space, but it looks to me that the major impediment to charging access is Tesla, and that the way to remove the impediment is to offer sufficient money.

 

[Zorg]

I think I understand what you're saying about a J1772 to NACS adapter from Tesla - something with built in firmware that allows it to be used on the SC network out of the box. But won't this existing (and relatively inexpensive) adapter from Lectron allow non-Teslas to use the SC charging network IF the needed software changes were in place?

It's understandable that Tesla doesn't want to surrender what is a big competitive advantage for them for litle gain. They seem to be OK with doing so when there is sufficient financial incentive however. Back in February, for example, that incentive seemed to be access to IRA grant funding. It's not clear if that was enough however - as far as I can tell the only concrete result was that Tesla retrofitted a handful of charging stations with the Magic Dock apparatus. The recent arrangement with Ford must also be financially attractive to Tesla or they would not have entered into it.

I'm a greenhorn in the EV space, but it looks to me that the major impediment to charging access is Tesla, and that the way to remove the impediment is to offer sufficient money.

It's Elon. No one knows the motivation. .

 

[Dark-Fx]

But won't this existing (and relatively inexpensive) adapter from Lectron allow non-Teslas to use the SC charging network IF the needed software changes were in place?

No, superchargers would need to hit the DC pins on the CCS connector, so this type of connector would never work.

CCS actually consists of multiple components. The connector and the protocol. You don't have to use the connector to be compliant with the protocol.

"NACS" uses the CCS signaling protocol, which the newer Tesla vehicles understand and v3 stations support. v2 supercharging stations only support Tesla's proprietary protocol which is CAN based and a lot closer to how ChaDeMO works, which is why Tesla was selling the ChaDeMO to Tesla adapters first. The translation was easy to do.

CCS signaling uses HomePlug Green Phy which is a type of Power-Line Control. The two protocols are vastly different and require different control circuitry in the vehicle. It should be technically possible to make an adapter that handles the protocol translation, but it would definitely mean added cost to it versus what Tesla is doing now for their current adapters. The CCS to Tesla adapters essentially are just taking one port and mapping it to their connector, much like the J1772 connectors function. All of the protocol handling is done on the vehicle.

ChaDeMO to CCS adapters do actually exist, although I've never used one of them or heard of anyone who has directly. The fact that this adapter exists while Tesla's protocol is so closely related and those adapters don't exist means Tesla has just not decided to make them yet.
https://ev-chargers.com/accessories/chademo-to-sae-ccs-1-j1772-adapter/

 

[docwhiz]

No, superchargers would need to hit the DC pins on the CCS connector, so this type of connector would never work.

CCS actually consists of multiple components. The connector and the protocol. You don't have to use the connector to be compliant with the protocol.

"NACS" uses the CCS signaling protocol, which the newer Tesla vehicles understand and v3 stations support. v2 supercharging stations only support Tesla's proprietary protocol which is CAN based and a lot closer to how ChaDeMO works, which is why Tesla was selling the ChaDeMO to Tesla adapters first. The translation was easy to do.

CCS signaling uses HomePlug Green Phy which is a type of Power-Line Control. The two protocols are vastly different and require different control circuitry in the vehicle. It should be technically possible to make an adapter that handles the protocol translation, but it would definitely mean added cost to it versus what Tesla is doing now for their current adapters. The CCS to Tesla adapters essentially are just taking one port and mapping it to their connector, much like the J1772 connectors function. All of the protocol handling is done on the vehicle.

ChaDeMO to CCS adapters do actually exist, although I've never used one of them or heard of anyone who has directly. The fact that this adapter exists while Tesla's protocol is so closely related and those adapters don't exist means Tesla has just not decided to make them yet.
https://ev-chargers.com/accessories/chademo-to-sae-ccs-1-j1772-adapter/

It's just software.

 

[Yossarian]

No, superchargers would need to hit the DC pins on the CCS connector, so this type of connector would never work.
. . .

Does this mean that the Lectron type of adapter works on Tesla chargers, just not their SuperChargers? And does it also mean that a different adapter, one that apparently can be made only from the rarest and most precious material on earth, Elontanium, needs to be developed to allow J1772 connectivty to Tesla SC's?

Sponsored