Sponsored
When Native NACS on R1T - Any Insight?
- Thread starter CampfireWisdom
- Start date
- Watchers 5
-
- Tags
- nacs nacs port r1s r1t
tps5352
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2020
- Threads
- 22
- Messages
- 235
- Reaction score
- 285
- Location
- California Central Valley
- Vehicles
- 2026 Tesla Model X All-Wheel Drive (5-seater)
The USA is so polarized right now.
1. 49.5% prefer the CCS1 charge standard.
2. 49.5% use the SAE J3400 charge standard.
3. 1% own 1973 AMC Gremlins.
When will our Nation heal?
1. 49.5% prefer the CCS1 charge standard.
2. 49.5% use the SAE J3400 charge standard.
3. 1% own 1973 AMC Gremlins.
When will our Nation heal?
Last edited:
electruck
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2019
- Threads
- 74
- Messages
- 4,168
- Reaction score
- 7,743
- Location
- Dallas, TX
- Vehicles
- 2023 Rivian R1S
Changing the connector alone does not guarantee improved charging performance. Right now the battery pack and BMS are the limiting factor. So I truly don't care until Rivian announces a vehicle that can charge faster than the current 220-ish kW. While I do think Rivian should expedite the move to an 800V architecture, they honestly don't need to improve peak charge rate. What they need to do is improve the area under the charging curve (ie, maintain peak for a longer window of time).
electruck
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2019
- Threads
- 74
- Messages
- 4,168
- Reaction score
- 7,743
- Location
- Dallas, TX
- Vehicles
- 2023 Rivian R1S
The road to recovery can only begin once we've hit rock bottom. We're not there yet....
Sponsored
mpshizzle
Well-Known Member
The connector is capable of higher power than CCS...
BUT - the R1 charging curve is nowhere near the limit of what CCS can do. So the added headroom the NACS connector gives won't be of benefit to the charging performance.
electruck
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2019
- Threads
- 74
- Messages
- 4,168
- Reaction score
- 7,743
- Location
- Dallas, TX
- Vehicles
- 2023 Rivian R1S
Well, there are facts and then there is understanding the implications of those facts. The standard allows for more power but it doesn't guarantee or require it. For example, Tesla v3 superchargers I believe support up to 250 kW, which is actually less than supported by CCS1. And the v4 supercharger launched at 250 kW, then got upgraded to 350 kW and has the potential to go higher. So, as you can see, the connector type alone doesn't dictate the available power output.
The other half of the charge rate equation is what the vehicle is capable of consuming. The charger will only supply what the vehicle requests, up to the charger limits - hence my prior statement that the battery pack and BMS are presently the limiting factor. CCS1 and Tesla v3/v4 standards already support far greater than current generation Rivians can consume.
J3400 is a step in the right direction for establishing a single charging standard for all vehicles and it will allow headroom for future growth. From what I've seen so far, even though R2 will have the NACS port, it is still expected to charge at about the same rate as R1. And to my knowledge, there isn't a passenger EV on the road today that can consume more than CCS1 can currently supply - not even the Lucid Gravity. Now that charging networks like Walmart, Ionna, and even EA are starting to provide both CCS1 and J3400 connectors, I think the days of needing adapters for fast charging will be short lived. Hence, I don't really care about when manufacturers switch to J3400 and my future EV purchase decisions will be based on lots of things but charge port type will not be one of the deciding factors.
Sponsored
