Top 16 Reasons Switching to NACS Standard is a Colossal Win for the Consumer

[2025R1S]

We have a different post covering some of potential risks of having NACS become more widely adopted; why not have a post covering some of the benefits? Feel free to add comments of anything I have missed. Here we go….

• ADA compliant. I am partially disabled, and a normal functioning adult with a disfigured arm. Partially disabled adults like myself are easily able to plug a NACS cable in, remove it, and hang it back up. This isn’t the case for CCS - i usually have to flag someone down to help me disconnect. Partially disabled people are discouraged from buying CCS EV due to CCS design defects
• it’s reliable. How many of us have shown up to a CCS location to find less than 50% of the chargers functioning? How many of us have shown up to a CCS location to find as few as 1/6 or 1/8 chargers working?
• It’s intelligent. The Supercharger network, combined with navigation software, will intelligently route you to less busy chargers, if it will save time. Before you arrive; You can see how busy they, you can see wait times - all from your phone or car
• Less lines at the charger. Due to the size of the supercharger network and the number of locations, in all but the most congested areas - consumers find there are less lines at Superchargers than CCS stations. CCS cars will naively route drivers to stations with 60 minute+ waits.
• Number of locations. Superchargers exist at ski resorts, boat marines, beaches, towns with 800 population, and are nearly everywhere people want to be. The path forward with the least amount of friction is to continue to expand this network, unless CCS is redesigned and redeployed with updated plug
• Support Made in USA. With the Tesla Supercharger Manufactured in Buffalo, NY - everytime you charge at a Supercharger- you support American labor. ABB, Delta, Signet and others manufacture their chargers overseas in places like Southeast Asia
• Native plug and charge ability. There are no games to play, NACS native vehicles show up to chargers and just start charging.
• No dependency on credit card readers, remote activation or NFC. Credit card readers; is this 1989? Just let me plug in and charge. Having to depend on cell service to scan a QR code doesn’t work in many areas.
• Superchargers are cheaper. The per stall costs of a Supercharger are a fraction of a CCS station. Tesla clearly has streamlined production and installation; resulting in the lowest costs in the industry. Proceeding with CCS will result in taxpayer dollars wasted on overpriced CCS chargers
• installed count of stations faster than 150kW. I might be partially disabled, but I’m not blind. There are more CCS chargers being installed - but the number of stations faster than 150kW being installed is surprisingly small. Tesla installs more 250kW chargers in 1 month than the rest of the industry will install. How many 22kW, 54kW, and 62kW CCS chargers does America need, and who wants to charge that slow?
• NACS passes the grandparent test. Do you like supporting your parents, aunts, uncles and grandparents with all of their technical problems? Did you also buy your parents an iPad so that you can enjoy thanksgiving instead of providing tech support? Do you want to provide technical support to your aunt trying to figure out how to use a CCS1 charger?
• Better designed cars. Automakers have to design massive cutouts for CCS right now. By reducing the plug size in half, automakers can sneak the charging port in more locations.
• Locations. It’s not just the number of locations, but the actual geographic location as well. Broadly speaking - consumers encounter more unsafe CCS locations than Supercharger locations. Superchargers are, somehow, often placed in nicer areas. Whereas my wife has skipped charging at CCS Walmart stations more than once due to how unsafe it felt. We don’t understand why CCS stations must be installed at Walmarts or in other rough neighborhoods - is this part of the CCS1 spec?
• Demonstrated ability to deliver. No one else has demonstrated they are able to deliver anything close to the NACS experience. Why take our chances with unreliable technology?
• Future proof. We’re reading about V4 Superchargers with longer cables and excited. Now we read about how V4 stations will have support for 1000v output. Despite NACS already being the standard that consumers expect; Charging on NACS is always improving, while the connector stays the same. At the same time, there have been no improvements with CCS
• NACS is supported by a company that needs it to succeed. Because NACS is originally implemented by Tesla, Tesla needs it to succeed or their brand doesn’t succeed. No other brand depends on CCS succeeding or operating reliably. The lack of commitment that all brands show to CCS is evident by widespread reliability and slow charge speeds.

Sponsored

 

[VSG]

On all of these points, you're making the mistake of conflating the Tesla plug "NACS" with access to the Tesla supercharger network. They are not the same.

1. Having an "NACS" receptacle on your vehicle does not give you access to the supercharger network.
2. The supercharger network does not need "NACS" to work.

I think what we all primarily want is more chargers, more reliable chargers, more powerful chargers, and to a lesser extent more usable chargers and less expensive charging sessions.

We can get these things if the supercharger network were opened up to CCS vehicles. Tesla would greatly benefit from this. And I believed they have promised several times to do this. But "NACS" isn't required or needed to do this.

The quickest and least costly path to reaching this goal is for Tesla to deploy their Magic Dock connectors on more superchargers (currently only at 11 locations). This does cost Tesla a relatively small amount per station, which they could recover quickly with revenue from a huge new user base. Tesla has demonstrated great manufacturing prowess, and has said the Magic Dock connectors are a cheap a quick retrofit, so in theory Tesla could drastically change the EV charging landscape before the end of the year. This would be a win for everyone.

The next quickest but far more costly route is for Tesla to make and sell adapters. But only Tesla can do this. Tesla would profit greatly from this because they would have a monopoly on the adapters (superchargers are proprietary) and because they would again gain a huge new user base paying them for adapters and charging. This is certainly a slower way to achieve the same result, but far more expensive for the consumer because now a million vehicle owners will need an adapter, vs just 10's of thousands of Magic Docks needed. The adapters aren't available yet - maybe next year - and it will take time to get millions of them available.

The absolute slowest and most expensive way to reach the goal is to force every CCS vehicle to switch to an "NACS" receptacle AND to pay Tesla not just for charging but for access to the supercharger network. Even if you assume all manufacturers are going to jump on this and pay off Tesla, this is still several years out (according to Ford and GM). And "NACS" isn't even a standard yet, and that's going to take time if it ever happens. This strategy maximizes Tesla's profits by maximizing the cost to the consumer.

That's all I want to say here - I'll address each of your points separately in later posts, but bottom line is you're touting advantages of the supercharger network, which have almost nothing to do with having an "NACS" receptacle, and which are advantages in part because the supercharger network is closed and proprietary and only has to deal with a narrow range of conditions because Tesla controls both the charger and the vehicle.

 

[Jason]

On all of these points, you're making the mistake of conflating the Tesla plug "NACS" with access to the Tesla supercharger network. They are not the same.

1. Having an "NACS" receptacle on your vehicle does not give you access to the supercharger network.
2. The supercharger network does not need "NACS" to work.

I think what we all primarily want is more chargers, more reliable chargers, more powerful chargers, and to a lesser extent more usable chargers and less expensive charging sessions.

We can get these things if the supercharger network were opened up to CCS vehicles. Tesla would greatly benefit from this. And I believed they have promised several times to do this. But "NACS" isn't required or needed to do this.

The quickest and least costly path to reaching this goal is for Tesla to deploy their Magic Dock connectors on more superchargers (currently only at 11 locations). This does cost Tesla a relatively small amount per station, which they could recover quickly with revenue from a huge new user base. Tesla has demonstrated great manufacturing prowess, and has said the Magic Dock connectors are a cheap a quick retrofit, so in theory Tesla could drastically change the EV charging landscape before the end of the year. This would be a win for everyone.

The next quickest but far more costly route is for Tesla to make and sell adapters. But only Tesla can do this. Tesla would profit greatly from this because they would have a monopoly on the adapters (superchargers are proprietary) and because they would again gain a huge new user base paying them for adapters and charging. This is certainly a slower way to achieve the same result, but far more expensive for the consumer because now a million vehicle owners will need an adapter, vs just 10's of thousands of Magic Docks needed. The adapters aren't available yet - maybe next year - and it will take time to get millions of them available.

The absolute slowest and most expensive way to reach the goal is to force every CCS vehicle to switch to an "NACS" receptacle AND to pay Tesla not just for charging but for access to the supercharger network. Even if you assume all manufacturers are going to jump on this and pay off Tesla, this is still several years out (according to Ford and GM). And "NACS" isn't even a standard yet, and that's going to take time if it ever happens. This strategy maximizes Tesla's profits by maximizing the cost to the consumer.

That's all I want to say here - I'll address each of your points separately in later posts, but bottom line is you're touting advantages of the supercharger network, which have almost nothing to do with having an "NACS" receptacle, and which are advantages in part because the supercharger network is closed and proprietary and only has to deal with a narrow range of conditions because Tesla controls both the charger and the vehicle.

You are correct, but if other stations and cars went to NACS we would have the same happy world. There are fewer cars and stations with CCS so it would be cheaper overall to swap those out to the much better NACS connector.

 

[goldburger]

The ada compliance is a real thing I appreciate that point quite a bit.

Conflating Walmart and lower income neighborhoods as unsafe is pretty motivated tho. Lower income people deserve EV chargers as well

 

[2025R1S]

I disagree with the magic dock retrofit being the fastest solution. Why would Tesla retrofit old 250kW V3 Superchargers with short cables and no support for 1000v CyberTrucks and other high voltage vehicles?

Tesla has the momentum going with network expansion and maintaining its existing network. Diverting manufacturing and labor toward retrofitting old stations would cause stagnation and decrease network growth - and ultimately slow EV adoption.

The fastest solution is the best charging standard wins - everyone keeps doing what they are doing (Tesla keeps rolling out more 250kW Superchargers in 1 month than 250kW+ CCS stations installed in 12 months), we all live in adapter hell while everyone decides to use NACS, everyone begins to install CCS/NACS chargers for NEVI funding, NEVI funding gets exhausted and every charger manufacturer ditches CCS or NEVI language is updated to allow NACS - which then allows everyone to focus on just installing NACS.

All the automakers customers get the adapters as they implement the NACS standard on their vehicles. At most, we’ll have 3-5 years of carrying around dongles and adapters.

Since every automaker has to sell vehicles with (4) plug types already (CCS1, CCS2, GB/T, and Japan/Korea plug); it makes no difference to them what their customers plug in with - they already are in the business of supporting multiple plug types. They want to compete on vehicles, not plug types. For automakers, it’s really whatever sucks the least……and is a viable option.

CCS is trash, Rivian is not. Please let me have a Rivian with a plug that I can use and a charging experience that I enjoy.

On all of these points, you're making the mistake of conflating the Tesla plug "NACS" with access to the Tesla supercharger network. They are not the same.

1. Having an "NACS" receptacle on your vehicle does not give you access to the supercharger network.
2. The supercharger network does not need "NACS" to work.

I think what we all primarily want is more chargers, more reliable chargers, more powerful chargers, and to a lesser extent more usable chargers and less expensive charging sessions.

We can get these things if the supercharger network were opened up to CCS vehicles. Tesla would greatly benefit from this. And I believed they have promised several times to do this. But "NACS" isn't required or needed to do this.

The quickest and least costly path to reaching this goal is for Tesla to deploy their Magic Dock connectors on more superchargers (currently only at 11 locations). This does cost Tesla a relatively small amount per station, which they could recover quickly with revenue from a huge new user base. Tesla has demonstrated great manufacturing prowess, and has said the Magic Dock connectors are a cheap a quick retrofit, so in theory Tesla could drastically change the EV charging landscape before the end of the year. This would be a win for everyone.

The next quickest but far more costly route is for Tesla to make and sell adapters. But only Tesla can do this. Tesla would profit greatly from this because they would have a monopoly on the adapters (superchargers are proprietary) and because they would again gain a huge new user base paying them for adapters and charging. This is certainly a slower way to achieve the same result, but far more expensive for the consumer because now a million vehicle owners will need an adapter, vs just 10's of thousands of Magic Docks needed. The adapters aren't available yet - maybe next year - and it will take time to get millions of them available.

The absolute slowest and most expensive way to reach the goal is to force every CCS vehicle to switch to an "NACS" receptacle AND to pay Tesla not just for charging but for access to the supercharger network. Even if you assume all manufacturers are going to jump on this and pay off Tesla, this is still several years out (according to Ford and GM). And "NACS" isn't even a standard yet, and that's going to take time if it ever happens. This strategy maximizes Tesla's profits by maximizing the cost to the consumer.

That's all I want to say here - I'll address each of your points separately in later posts, but bottom line is you're touting advantages of the supercharger network, which have almost nothing to do with having an "NACS" receptacle, and which are advantages in part because the supercharger network is closed and proprietary and only has to deal with a narrow range of conditions because Tesla controls both the charger and the vehicle.

I agree about EV chargers being accessible to people of all incomes and locations. I do wish there were more CCS options in safer areas.

The ada compliance is a real thing I appreciate that point quite a bit.

Conflating Walmart and lower income neighborhoods as unsafe is pretty motivated tho. Lower income people deserve EV chargers as well

 

[VSG]

You are correct, but if other stations and cars went to NACS we would have the same happy world.

No, this is not so, because having an "NACS" receptacle does not give you access to the supercharger network. Almost all the advantages cited above are advantages of the supercharger network and have nothing to do with the plug.

There are fewer cars and stations with CCS so it would be cheaper overall to swap those out to the much better NACS connector.

It would be cheaper not to swap out anything to begin with. But Teslas already have access to the CCS network, so swapping a plug does absolutely nothing to help Tesla users. What we need is for CCS vehicles to have more options, and that can't be done just by changing the receptacle on CCS vehicles. CCS vehicle won't have access to the supercharger network just because they have the "NACS" receptacle.

 

[VSG]

The ada compliance is a real thing I appreciate that point quite a bit.

Here is what the OP said:

• ADA compliant. I am partially disabled, and a normal functioning adult with a disfigured arm. Partially disabled adults like myself are easily able to plug a NACS cable in, remove it, and hang it back up. This isn’t the case for CCS - i usually have to flag someone down to help me disconnect. Partially disabled people are discouraged from buying CCS EV due to CCS design defects

This is your strongest point in favor of a smaller plug, IMO. But not all disabilities are the same - while this is more convenient for you personally, no EV charging station I've been to is currently ADA compliant. Tesla superchargers currently already have the Tesla plug, but they're still not ADA compliant. And the path to ADA compliance is still fraught with problems - giving the vehicles Tesla receptacles won't make the parking spot width ADA compliant, for example. Gas stations get around this because they theoretically have attendants to help you with the pump, but in actuality that doesn't work so well. Most EV chargers don't have attendants, so while a lighter and more easily manipulated cable makes it more accessible to some it doesn't make much of a difference to many others. So while a smaller plug could help, it's certainly not a solution to ADA compliance of EV chargers.

Conflating Walmart and lower income neighborhoods as unsafe is pretty motivated tho. Lower income people deserve EV chargers as well

I agree.

• Locations. It’s not just the number of locations, but the actual geographic location as well. Broadly speaking - consumers encounter more unsafe CCS locations than Supercharger locations. Superchargers are, somehow, often placed in nicer areas. Whereas my wife has skipped charging at CCS Walmart stations more than once due to how unsafe it felt. We don’t understand why CCS stations must be installed at Walmarts or in other rough neighborhoods - is this part of the CCS1 spec?

This has nothing to do with the CCS plug. Tesla has the largest charging network in the US. Conceded. No one is contesting that. But your claim about "unsafe locations" sounds pretty subjective - have you actually seen studies of crime rates at EV charger locations? Or is it just your impression that these locations are sketchier than the upscale locations where you and your fellow Tesla owners gather? Or, perhaps, just perhaps, this is selection bias on your part - because there are so many more superchargers you can choose the ones you personally are more comfortable with, as opposed to having to stop at places that make you feel uncomfortable. Like those sketch neighborhoods where they don't have a Whole Foods? Really, a Walmart feels unsafe to you? Seems more like a you problem.

Walmarts are ubiquitous, have plenty of parking, and provide convenient access to things you might need while on a road trip. I applaud Walmart for supporting EV charging, and for supporting RV owners - these are not things they need to do, and I'm not sure they're making much money off of this, but I appreciate it with my business whenever I stop to charge on a road trip.

 

[VSG]

I disagree with the magic dock retrofit being the fastest solution.

OK, but why? You think retrofitting every CCS car with a Tesla port will be quicker? You think manufacturing and selling Tesla->CCS adapters will be quicker? If retrofitting with Magic Dock not the fastest solution, what do you think IS?

All the automakers customers get the adapters as they implement the NACS standard on their vehicles. At most, we’ll have 3-5 years of carrying around dongles and adapters.

How is 3-5 years faster when they were able to do all the existing retrofits in 1 day? They could have retrofitted 1,000 stations by now if they kept up that pace. A lot quicker than your theoretical 3-5 years (if all goes according to your plan), which is frankly pretty unrealistic for infrastructure.

Why would Tesla retrofit old 250kW V3 Superchargers with short cables and no support for 1000v CyberTrucks and other high voltage vehicles?

Because they said they would?

And because it would open those "old" superchargers up to all the people who don't own Teslas. As the number of EV models grows, Tesla's share of the EV market shrinks. Their supercharger business has the potential to become a profit center, if it's not already, and they can quickly recoup any sunk cost for the Magic Dock refit by adjusting their charging prices for non-Teslas accordingly.

Frankly, if the supercharger network is as superior as people make it out to be, then by installing the Magic Dock connectors they will quickly dominate the CCS charging market. And make lots of money.

So why WOULDN'T they do this?

 

[manitou202]

You are mixing Tesla's charging network with the NACS plug. See my comments below.

• ADA compliant. I am partially disabled, and a normal functioning adult with a disfigured arm. Partially disabled adults like myself are easily able to plug a NACS cable in, remove it, and hang it back up. This isn’t the case for CCS - i usually have to flag someone down to help me disconnect. Partially disabled people are discouraged from buying CCS EV due to CCS design defects
• it’s reliable. How many of us have shown up to a CCS location to find less than 50% of the chargers functioning? How many of us have shown up to a CCS location to find as few as 1/6 or 1/8 chargers working? Tesla's network is more reliable than other networks, which has nothing to do with the NACS plug.
• It’s intelligent. The Supercharger network, combined with navigation software, will intelligently route you to less busy chargers, if it will save time. Before you arrive; You can see how busy they, you can see wait times - all from your phone or car. This is a feature of Tesla's closed network, not the NACS plug. This feature doesn't exist by the way.
• Less lines at the charger. Due to the size of the supercharger network and the number of locations, in all but the most congested areas - consumers find there are less lines at Superchargers than CCS stations. CCS cars will naively route drivers to stations with 60 minute+ waits. Many Tesla locations have longer lines, hence the reason many Tesla owners now have CCS adapters to use other locations. Personally I've never waiting to charge at a CCS location over the past 4 years of road trips.
• Number of locations. Superchargers exist at ski resorts, boat marines, beaches, towns with 800 population, and are nearly everywhere people want to be. The path forward with the least amount of friction is to continue to expand this network, unless CCS is redesigned and redeployed with updated plug. Not true across the country. Colorado has much better CCS coverage versus NACS coverage.
• Support Made in USA. With the Tesla Supercharger Manufactured in Buffalo, NY - everytime you charge at a Supercharger- you support American labor. ABB, Delta, Signet and others manufacture their chargers overseas in places like Southeast Asia. Nothing to do with the CSS versus NACS plug.
• Native plug and charge ability. There are no games to play, NACS native vehicles show up to chargers and just start charging. This will only be the case if each automaker sets up a contract with Tesla to be part of their network. Other automakers have similar situations with EA. CCS has the same capability as NACS in this regard.
• No dependency on credit card readers, remote activation or NFC. Credit card readers; is this 1989? Just let me plug in and charge. Having to depend on cell service to scan a QR code doesn’t work in many areas. Again, this is only if automakers have a contract with Tesla. CCS has the same capability.
• Superchargers are cheaper. The per stall costs of a Supercharger are a fraction of a CCS station. Tesla clearly has streamlined production and installation; resulting in the lowest costs in the industry. Proceeding with CCS will result in taxpayer dollars wasted on overpriced CCS chargers. Nothing to do with the CSS versus NACS plug.
• installed count of stations faster than 150kW. I might be partially disabled, but I’m not blind. There are more CCS chargers being installed - but the number of stations faster than 150kW being installed is surprisingly small. Tesla installs more 250kW chargers in 1 month than the rest of the industry will install. How many 22kW, 54kW, and 62kW CCS chargers does America need, and who wants to charge that slow? Most new CCS chargers are 150kw+. Chargepoint for example has recently gone around Colorado to upgrade all of their 62.5kW chargers to 150kW. Also, nothing to do with the NACS plug.
• NACS passes the grandparent test. Do you like supporting your parents, aunts, uncles and grandparents with all of their technical problems? Did you also buy your parents an iPad so that you can enjoy thanksgiving instead of providing tech support? Do you want to provide technical support to your aunt trying to figure out how to use a CCS1 charger? Nothing to do with the CSS versus NASC plug.
• Better designed cars. Automakers have to design massive cutouts for CCS right now. By reducing the plug size in half, automakers can sneak the charging port in more locations.
• Locations. It’s not just the number of locations, but the actual geographic location as well. Broadly speaking - consumers encounter more unsafe CCS locations than Supercharger locations. Superchargers are, somehow, often placed in nicer areas. Whereas my wife has skipped charging at CCS Walmart stations more than once due to how unsafe it felt. We don’t understand why CCS stations must be installed at Walmarts or in other rough neighborhoods - is this part of the CCS1 spec? Nothing to do with the CSS versus NACS plug. If you want a counter example, when driving to our ski resort, there are three CCS charging sites along the way. All at convenient locations. The only Supercharger site is about 10 miles out of the way.
• Demonstrated ability to deliver. No one else has demonstrated they are able to deliver anything close to the NACS experience. Why take our chances with unreliable technology? Nothing to do with the CSS versus NACS plug.
• Future proof. We’re reading about V4 Superchargers with longer cables and excited. Now we read about how V4 stations will have support for 1000v output. Despite NACS already being the standard that consumers expect; Charging on NACS is always improving, while the connector stays the same. At the same time, there have been no improvements with CCS. CCS already has much longer cables than V4 Superchargers. CCS also has 1000V capability and V2G and V2H.
• NACS is supported by a company that needs it to succeed. Because NACS is originally implemented by Tesla, Tesla needs it to succeed or their brand doesn’t succeed. No other brand depends on CCS succeeding or operating reliably. The lack of commitment that all brands show to CCS is evident by widespread reliability and slow charge speeds. Tesla owns the NACS patents and controls all legal rights. This could be very bad for other automakers. A standard controlled by an independent agency is absolutely essential to create a level playing field for all automakers.

A future where one automaker controls all charging plugs and chargers is terrible for consumers. Other charging companies need to improve their reliability and reduce costs. But leaving everything to Tesla is not the way to go.

 

[VSG]

Since every automaker has to sell vehicles with (4) plug types already (CCS1, CCS2, GB/T, and Japan/Korea plug); it makes no difference to them what their customers plug in with - they already are in the business of supporting multiple plug types. They want to compete on vehicles, not plug types. For automakers, it’s really whatever sucks the least……and is a viable option.

CCS is trash ...

Don't confuse my arguments against moving to "NACS" as the same as being pro-CCS.

I am pro STANDARD. Which "NACS" is most certainly not, which is why I put it in quotes because that "S" is so-called and self-proclaimed.

I think having one or a few (hopefully interoperable) uniform international standards will benefit everyone.

I am adamantly opposed to giving control to one company with proprietary technology because that always comes at the expense of all other companies, and the expense of competition, and ultimately at the expense of the consumer in the long run.

The Tesla plug could be part of the CCS standard - Tesla has participated in the CCS standards body for a long time and hasn't made any progress towards this. I'm not sure why because I'm not privy to those meetings, but I suspect it's because they are reluctant to give up their control of the design and because they are unwilling to modify their design to accommodate other industry needs. Like the need for 3-phase in parts of the world, and like the need/want for things like V2H in the standard. Again, I don't know the details, but it would take a hell of a lot more than personal animosity towards Tesla to disqualify something portrayed as overwhelmingly technically superior. So maybe consider that there may be serious problems that prevent the standards body from moving forward with it.

The Tesla plug is not a standard. Tesla is talking about making it a standard, but the way they're doing it is apparently venue-shopping for a standards body that will let them make the rules. That happens a lot in the standards world when a company tries to retain control of their proprietary technology.

 

[VSG]

So again, this thread is not about the "Top 16 Reasons Switching to NACS Standard is a Colossal Win for the Consumer" because the points being made are almost entirely about the supercharger network, not the "NACS" plug.

I don't think I've read a single person, in any forum thread, saying that the Tesla Superchargers are bad.

On the contrary, I think everyone agrees that the Tesla Supercharger network is something that serves as a model of what we should expect from a charger network, and I think everyone with a CCS vehicle would like to have access to the Tesla Supercharger network, which we could choose to use or not.

Opening up the Tesla Supercharger network to CCS vehicles only takes one person to decide to do that. That's all. Despite what they've been saying for a long time, Tesla doesn't seem to want to do that. I'm not going to put words in their mouth about why - the fact remains that they have demonstrated the ability to do this in Europe and with the Magic Docks, they have said they would do this, and yet they have not done it. Actions speak louder than words here. They can single-handedly improve the charging infrastructure for CCS vehicles, but they aren't doing that.

 

[evguy]

Two thoughts from an owner of both a Tesla and a Rivian:

• As far as charging plugs go, I much prefer NACS to J1772/CCS for ease of use and its more elegant design. I hope NACS becomes the standard long term and if that means I have to use an adapter with my CCS-equipped Rivian for a while, I'm happy to accept that as a cost of being an early Rivian adopter.
  
  
• I agree the debate over the merits of the Supercharger network is distinct from the NACS v. CCS debate - While I love using Superchargers for my Tesla, I'm not eager to use them in my Rivian if/when Tesla strikes a deal with Rivian. The vast majority of Superchargers are designed for EVs with rear-left charge ports and have short cables. Therefore, charging a Rivian, GM, Ford (or any other EV that doesn't have a rear-left charge port) at a busy Supercharger presents physical complications that you don't have with a Tesla. I wonder how many excited Ford/GM buyers understand that.

 

[dfx]

So again, this thread is not about the "Top 16 Reasons Switching to NACS Standard is a Colossal Win for the Consumer" because the points being made are almost entirely about the supercharger network, not the "NACS" plug.

I don't think I've read a single person, in any forum thread, saying that the Tesla Superchargers are bad.

On the contrary, I think everyone agrees that the Tesla Supercharger network is something that serves as a model of what we should expect from a charger network, and I think everyone with a CCS vehicle would like to have access to the Tesla Supercharger network, which we could choose to use or not.

Opening up the Tesla Supercharger network to CCS vehicles only takes one person to decide to do that. That's all. Despite what they've been saying for a long time, Tesla doesn't seem to want to do that. I'm not going to put words in their mouth about why - the fact remains that they have demonstrated the ability to do this in Europe and with the Magic Docks, they have said they would do this, and yet they have not done it. Actions speak louder than words here. They can single-handedly improve the charging infrastructure for CCS vehicles, but they aren't doing that.

I agree. I will say that we don't know what the future will exactly hold. The Supercharger network is vastly superior to any other charging network. It's not even close. It's also a result of it being first and enjoying a period of 8 plus years where Tesla vehicles comprised over 90% of EV's in the States.
It should be all of our hopes that in 5 years the Supercharger network is like AOL was in 2001- still viable and performing for its client base but no longer the only game in town and falling fast because of better alternatives

 

[SoCal Rob]

I tend to think in concrete examples of some concepts and I think I finally figured out a good way of expressing the difference between the connector and the charging network.

Let’s say we have 2 houses across town from each other:

House A is a 3 bedroom 2 bathroom house with a view of the lake. It has a Dexter round door knob on the door.

House B is a 4 bedroom 2 bathroom house with a view of the mountains. It has a Schlage lever-style door knob on the door.

Thinking that giving people the NACS connector (even via an adapter) will automatically give them access to the entire Supercharger network without any other changes is like thinking that if you live in house A and you change your door knob to a Schlage lever-style (like on house B) it will automatically give you an extra bedroom and a view of the mountains without any other changes.

People want access to the resources (house B or greater number of locations and stalls the Supercharger network provides) and most don’t seem too picky about what opens the door to it for them as long they can use it: Dexter knob/Schlage lever or CCS/NACS.

 

[Brewbud]

For NACS to work for all brands the cable will need to be longer. I expect it then may need to be thicker to handle the current. If a NACS charger has a longer cable will it still be less unwieldy than CCS?

Sponsored