Sponsored

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

cdub

Well-Known Member
First Name
Chris
Joined
May 19, 2023
Threads
3
Messages
75
Reaction score
126
Location
SoCal
Vehicles
Nissan Leaf 2011
Occupation
Editor
I would be interested to know how many times this has happened to a Tesla. If it happened a lot you would think it would be very public.
Probably zero times. It would have been ALL over the Tesla forums. They complain about EVERYTHING.
Sponsored

 

2025R1S

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 31, 2022
Threads
2
Messages
143
Reaction score
135
Location
Jacksonville
Vehicles
Ford Fiesta
The adapter comment is meant to speak to the least friction, fastest way for everyone who wants to charge on any Tesla Supercharger the ability to charge at them. It says something that the most popular EV brand, Tesla, already has their customers carrying around up to half a dozen adapters (if they need it)
  1. Mobile charger for L1/L2 charging
    1. Adapters for NEMA 14-50, NEMA 15-30, etc
  2. Adapter for J1772 to Tesla if CCS car, elseif Tesla then NACS to J1772
  3. Tesla to CCS adapter
  4. Chademo adapter
    1. Which has a pigtail

Magic Dock isn’t the solution for multiple reasons. The Magic Dock hs fixed location with no extended cords - it doesn’t make charging other EV’s (truly) possible. V4 Superchargers do not exist in North America. V4 Superchargers with Magic Dock do not exist anywhere.

Throughout 2023 - people speculated all new Superchargers would have pull through design; this hasn’t happened. People speculated they would be placed in any manner that allows more EV’s with unique port placement to reach; this hasn’t happened. They speculated everything, and none of it has happened. I am not patient enough to wait for these non-existent solutions to become a reality. It’s June 2023, and we’ve seen how fast Magic Dock is rolling out. The solution isn’t Magic Dock.

Ford drivers have to wait months for their own adapter; fat chance (aka not gonna happen) of Tesla making a universal CCS to Tesla adapter. But once this adapter is available in warehouses and made available for sale; Ford owners will be just hours away from receiving a product that opens up the entire Supercharger network - ideally with a pigtail to allow them to reach all the chargers. Long term - it would suggest Ford is going to move their port to a rear/front/corner like Nissan/Rivian/Tesla.

EV’s are pretty frustrating really; because what people want over the years vs. what people need vs. what people get are totally different. As someone who has road tripped in both CCS and Tesla vehicles; I see the fastest path forward to me having a better experience being NACS on everything, common port placement (front, rear, or corner), and everyone getting an adapter to either;
  • Gain access to J1772 (Tesla drivers)
  • Gain access to CCS (Tesla drivers)
  • Gain access to NACS Supercharger (CCS drivers)
  • Gain access to NACS Destination Chargers (CCS drivers)
  • NEMA L1/L2 adapters (Both Tesla and CCS drivers)
Basically, if we don’t standardize on something; it’s going to be adapter hell. CCS, in its current design, is not a better solution. NACS is a better solution. NACS also has a larger network. Therefore; I am ready to wave the white flag and give up on CCS. My CCS patron saint never came.

Err... an adapter that each car owner has to buy and carry around with them doesn't fix this problem at all. Ford can't abandon all of the current buyers or all of those between now and whoever they actually change the port over. Those vehicles will need the longer cable. The ones with the new port might also need a longer cable.


Wait, you think the adapter is going to be a pig-tail with several feet of cable rather than just a straight adapter? That would be a truly stunning decision by all parties involved. It's a bigger technical challenge, and it would be a terrible user experience--far worse than anybody can paint CCS as being by its own.
 

Autolycus

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 2, 2021
Threads
14
Messages
2,030
Reaction score
3,116
Location
ATL
Vehicles
ICE only :(
Basically, if we don’t standardize on something; it’s going to be adapter hell. CCS, in its current design, is not a better solution. NACS is a better solution. NACS also has a larger network. Therefore; I am ready to wave the white flag and give up on CCS. My CCS patron saint never came.
Everything you said about adapter hell is reasonable, but I think this last paragraph is where my frustration comes in. The reason we aren't standardized is because Tesla decided it knew better than everybody else and refused to accept the actual standard AC and DC ports. This is a problem that is 100% Tesla's fault. If they hadn't been forced by law to use CCS2 in Europe, there would still be a fractured market in Europe. If they had been willing to use CCS1 in North America, we wouldn't have a single complaint about "the CCS network"* because everybody would be competing using the same port, and we'd all have access to Superchargers already.

*(not quoting you with that phrase, just using that as a shorthand)
 

SoCal Rob

Well-Known Member
First Name
Rob
Joined
Apr 19, 2021
Threads
28
Messages
2,091
Reaction score
4,368
Location
Southern California
Vehicles
Rivian R1S & VW ID.4
Occupation
Information Technology
Clubs
 
CCS-J1772-Tesla.jpeg


Just leaving this here for thought
I see both sides of this discussion talking past one another. As I see it these are the points being made...

Pro-Tesla: Tesla’s connector is physically smaller and easier to manage for some people. Tesla’s charging network is more reliable and has more locations.

Pro-Standards: CCS is an open standard and not beholden to one manufacturer. Until the Tesla connector is a true open standard it is unlikely to gain universal acceptance.

Neither assertion invalidates the other because they are different issues.

In my opinion, both arguments are true: I can see how the smaller connector which doesn’t require a DC pin cover is going to be easier for some people to use. I don’t think there is any contention about the number and quality of Tesla charging stalls. I think Tesla is being disingenuous to call their connector NACS since using the word standard in the name doesn’t make it so.

I think Tesla has the power (forgive the unintended word play) to make both sides happy by specifying the requirements for a Tesla Supercharger to CCS adapter, relinquishing all control of their connector to make it a true standard, and opening the charging network so that any brand EV can pay via the Tesla app.
 

Sponsored

2025R1S

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 31, 2022
Threads
2
Messages
143
Reaction score
135
Location
Jacksonville
Vehicles
Ford Fiesta
I am with you. Tesla did their own thing. Tesla, like Apple, did not open up their design - they kept it proprietary.

CCS was designed by a committee and meant to be universally adopted. It failed to be universally adopted - Nissan would use Chademo. It failed to provide a better user experience. It was bulkier, heavy, hard to manage - and not something we’d wish on our worst enemy.

Even if Tesla switched to CCS tho; as we seen with Rivian - they can still keep their network private if they want.

Back to my point in a previous comment; it sucks no one really cared about CCS. The team that made it would be observing the competition with Tesla. It was a svelte design - the committee should have looked at CCS like IEEE does with USB. USB has went thru several iterations and constantly gotten better. While Tesla hasn’t done any changes with the plug; their plug was just awesome from day 1. But for CCS to beat NACS; then there needs to be a CCS 2.0 or something. But that isn’t necessarily good for us still; because it still means CCS (and presumably Tesla) drivers switching to another plug.

I don’t know what to say; EV’s are pretty frustrating. There is no patron saint of CCS.

Everything you said about adapter hell is reasonable, but I think this last paragraph is where my frustration comes in. The reason we aren't standardized is because Tesla decided it knew better than everybody else and refused to accept the actual standard AC and DC ports. This is a problem that is 100% Tesla's fault. If they hadn't been forced by law to use CCS2 in Europe, there would still be a fractured market in Europe. If they had been willing to use CCS1 in North America, we wouldn't have a single complaint about "the CCS network"* because everybody would be competing using the same port, and we'd all have access to Superchargers already.

*(not quoting you with that phrase, just using that as a shorthand)
 

scottf200

Well-Known Member
First Name
Scott
Joined
Nov 25, 2019
Threads
5
Messages
327
Reaction score
173
Location
Chicagoland
Vehicles
Past Ford Exped; curr TMX 100D; future BEV truck
Occupation
sw engineer
Wait, you think the adapter is going to be a pig-tail with several feet of cable rather than just a straight adapter? That would be a truly stunning decision by all parties involved. It's a bigger technical challenge, and it would be a terrible user experience--far worse than anybody can paint CCS as being by its own.
Tesla did make a 'short' pig-tail so it is not unheard of.

It wouldn't take much to make it work (Tom graphic below) for the existing Fords until Ford builds in the NACS.

Rivian R1T R1S Ford/Tesla Deal: Access to Superchargers, adapter coming, future EVs will have NACS (Tesla) port yDtdrxi

Rivian R1T R1S Ford/Tesla Deal: Access to Superchargers, adapter coming, future EVs will have NACS (Tesla) port NB1PuFc
 

Autolycus

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 2, 2021
Threads
14
Messages
2,030
Reaction score
3,116
Location
ATL
Vehicles
ICE only :(

2025R1S

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 31, 2022
Threads
2
Messages
143
Reaction score
135
Location
Jacksonville
Vehicles
Ford Fiesta
CCS is literally a user hostile solution. It is the opposite of ADA compliant. This isn’t a pro-Tesla argument. This is a basic usability topic where able people are unable to use the equipment. In Canada and the midwest - the CCS cables can get frozen to the vehicles! In Florda - the elderly need to flag down someone to wrestle the CCS cable in/out of their cars.

CCS needs a CCS 2.0, if it wants to be a better product. Fixing reliability or payment authorization with CCS won’t solve those problems.

I see both sides of this discussion talking past one another. As I see it these are the points being made...

Pro-Tesla: Tesla’s connector is physically smaller and easier to manage for some people. Tesla’s charging network is more reliable and has more locations.

Pro-Standards: CCS is an open standard and not beholden to one manufacturer. Until the Tesla connector is a true open standard it is unlikely to gain universal acceptance.

Neither assertion invalidates the other because they are different issues.
 

Sponsored

SoCal Rob

Well-Known Member
First Name
Rob
Joined
Apr 19, 2021
Threads
28
Messages
2,091
Reaction score
4,368
Location
Southern California
Vehicles
Rivian R1S & VW ID.4
Occupation
Information Technology
Clubs
 
CCS is literally a user hostile solution. It is the opposite of ADA compliant. This isn’t a pro-Tesla argument. This is a basic usability topic where able people are unable to use the equipment. In Canada and the midwest - the CCS cables can get frozen to the vehicles! In Florda - the elderly need to flag down someone to wrestle the CCS cable in/out of their cars.

CCS needs a CCS 2.0, if it wants to be a better product. Fixing reliability or payment authorization with CCS won’t solve those problems.
I’m personally not arguing with anyone about that, and you‘re just reinforcing what I wrote about the two sides talking past one another. As I wrote below what you quoted, I can see how the smaller connector which doesn’t require a DC pin cover is going to be easier for some people to use.

I do wonder, though, how flexible the Supercharger cables would be if they were as long as CCS cables to accommodate the wide variety of vehicle charge port locations. My understanding is that the longer the cable, the larger the conductors need to be to reduce resistance or the more active cooling is required to deal with the heat generated by resistance. If that is correct, then the Tesla cables being easier to use is entirely a matter of Tesla having control over the charge port location on their products which means they can use a much shorter cable. This efficiency is an advantage of having control over the vehicle AND the dispenser + station setup.

I think that standardizing charge port locations on EVs would be a good thing, too. Maybe something like the charge port needs to be located such that it is reachable in a perpendicular parking stall by a 3m cable originating within 1m of the center of the short end of the stall no higher than 2m above the parking surface and with the vehicle parked within .5m of the dispenser.

Mandating all new charging stations be pull-through and accessible from either direction, like most gas station setups, should eliminate the problems, too.
 

Jarico75

Well-Known Member
First Name
Joe
Joined
Jan 1, 2020
Threads
7
Messages
319
Reaction score
569
Location
Slc
Vehicles
Rivian R1T, Tesla Model Y, Camry Hybrid
Clubs
 
Everything you said about adapter hell is reasonable, but I think this last paragraph is where my frustration comes in. The reason we aren't standardized is because Tesla decided it knew better than everybody else and refused to accept the actual standard AC and DC ports. This is a problem that is 100% Tesla's fault. If they hadn't been forced by law to use CCS2 in Europe, there would still be a fractured market in Europe. If they had been willing to use CCS1 in North America, we wouldn't have a single complaint about "the CCS network"* because everybody would be competing using the same port, and we'd all have access to Superchargers already.

*(not quoting you with that phrase, just using that as a shorthand)
Maybe I misunderstood the timeline, but I think the CCS standard was adopted in 2012. The first charging station was not installed until late 2013 and vehicles using the connector were not sold in the US until 2014. Tesla began selling Model S's in 2012, suggesting their connector was already developed and implemented well before CCS was a thing. As a new startup with an already in-market connector, it was a prudent decision not to engage with a new charging standard while already in production with its own connector. Good or Bad, the US free market doesn't like standardization for fear of stifling innovation.
 

Autolycus

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 2, 2021
Threads
14
Messages
2,030
Reaction score
3,116
Location
ATL
Vehicles
ICE only :(
Maybe I misunderstood the timeline, but I think the CCS standard was adopted in 2012. The first charging station was not installed until late 2013 and vehicles using the connector were not sold in the US until 2014. Tesla began selling Model S's in 2012, suggesting their connector was already developed and implemented well before CCS was a thing. As a new startup with an already in-market connector, it was a prudent decision not to engage with a new charging standard while already in production with its own connector. Good or Bad, the US free market doesn't like standardization for fear of stifling innovation.
The first proposed Combined Charging Standard was published in October 2011. Before the end of 2011, BMW, Daimler, Ford, GM, and VW/Audi/Porsche had all committed to using CCS. Tesla could have easily done the same and started building the supercharger network based on the proposed standard and made any adjustments necessary once the final standard was approved.

SAE J1772 also predates CCS by more than a decade. Tesla could have used J1772 for AC. Instead, they chose to use their own proprietary port and force a divide in the market for home chargers as well. Thankfully that one is a much simpler adapter to deal with than high-power DC ones.
 

scottf200

Well-Known Member
First Name
Scott
Joined
Nov 25, 2019
Threads
5
Messages
327
Reaction score
173
Location
Chicagoland
Vehicles
Past Ford Exped; curr TMX 100D; future BEV truck
Occupation
sw engineer
The first proposed Combined Charging Standard was published in October 2011. Before the end of 2011, BMW, Daimler, Ford, GM, and VW/Audi/Porsche had all committed to using CCS. Tesla could have easily done the same and started building the supercharger network based on the proposed standard and made any adjustments necessary once the final standard was approved.
The major thing you are missing is that there were initially kW speed limits that did not meet Tesla criteria [and projected needs] early on.
 
Last edited:

Zorg

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 1, 2022
Threads
4
Messages
575
Reaction score
736
Location
SF bay area
Vehicles
Model X
End of the day the biggest issue is not the plug but the location on the car. Right now it's all over the place and it's a pain. Yesterday I saw an Audi parked at an EA station taking up 2 spots because of plug location and station design. CCS or NACS ports can work with an adapter if need be. But if the port location can't be reached easily it messes up everything.

Otherwise RAN chargers seem pretty reliable so far, though they're most likely not used that much so far
Sponsored

 
 




Top